( 


LIBRARY  ^l^^^^^^^'^  LIBRARY 
^iMiSS^li  OF  CALIFORNIA,  SAN  DIEGO 

CALIFORNIA 

SAN  DIEGO     p'om  the  collection  of 

Professor  Koppel  S.  Pinson 


LIBRARY 

OF 

HOLLYWOOD  INN 

YONKERS.    N.Y. 


cu.ss  3^2..  oe 

BOOK ^"^     V 


ACCESSION 


ftA«t) 


Si 


Digitized  by  tlie  Internet  Arcliive 

in  2007  witli  funding  from 

IVIicrosoft  Corporation 


littp://www.arcli  ive.org/details/englislipuritansOObrowiala 


The  Cambridge  Manuals  of  Science  and 
Literature 


THE 
ENGLISH    PURITANS 


CAMBRIDGE   UNIVERSITY  PRESS 

ILonlum:    FETTER  LANE,   E.G. 

0.  F.  CLAY,  Managkb 


t^lNf 

m 

IH 

^M' 

flRiinlmrflli:  100,  PEINCES  STREET 

Bfrim:  A.  ASHEE  AND  CO. 

ILtijjjifl:    P.   A.  BR0CKHAU8 

l^ttD  Sorft:  G.  P.  PUTNAM'S  SONS 

»otnb«E  "no  Calcutti:  MACMILLAN  AND  CO.,  Ltd. 


All  rightt  retervtd 


CambrtUge: 


PRINTED    BT    JOHN   OLAT,    M.A. 
AT  THE    UNITEB8ITT   FBESS. 


With  the  exception  of  the  coat  of  arms  at 
the  foot,  the  design  on  the  title  page  is  a 
reproduction  of  one  used  by  the  earliest  known 
Cambridge  printer,  John  Siberch,  1 5  2 1 

3^\ 


PREFACE 

THE  work  here  presented  to  the  reader  is  intended 
to  give,  within  moderate  compass  and  in  the 
light  of  recent  research,  the  history  of  the  rise,  growth 
and  decline  of  that  puritan  movement  which,  for  a 
hundred  years,  so  vitally  affected  the  course  of  our 
national  life.  It  aims  at  a  middle  course.  There 
have  been  historical  monographs  dealing  with  separate 
portions  of  the  movement ;  and  there  have  also  been 
connected  histories  of  it  as  a  whole ;  but  the  mono- 
graphs were  necessarily  sectional  and  incomplete; 
and  on  the  other  hand  the  connected  histories  were 
too  elaborate  and  therefore  too  lengthy  for  readers 
with  only  limited  time  at  their  disposal,  but  who  yet 
wished  to  arrive  at  a  fairly  trustworthy  knowledge  of 
the  subject.  It  is  hoped  this  little  book  may  to  some 
extent  meet  the  needs  of  readers  of  this  class. 

The  subject  is  worthy  of  attention,  for  puritanism 
had  important  bearings  both  upon  the  religious  life 
and  the  constitutional  history  of  the  nation.  It  was 
first  of  all  religious  in   its  character.     The  early 


ri  PREFACE 

puritans  had  no  political  views,  yet  their  religious 
opinions  worked  out  to  political  results.  Borgeaud 
has  shewn  that  modern  democracy  is  the  child  of 
the  Reformation,  not  of  the  reformers.  For  in  the 
Reformation  the  two  levers  used  to  break  the 
authority  of  the  Holy  See  were  free  enquiry  and 
the  priesthood  of  all  believers ;  and  these  two 
principles  contained  in  them  the  germs  of  the 
political  revolution  which  has  come  to  pass.  For 
they  made  the  community  the  visible  centre  of  the 
Church,  and  the  people  the  principal  factor  of  social 
life.  On  these  grounds  the  history  of  the  English 
puritans  deserves  to  be  known  from  within  and  in 
such  connected  form  as  the  necessary  limitations  of 
space  will  allow. 

J.  B. 

Hampstead, 

Jitne  20,  1910. 


CONTENTS 

PAQE 

I.    The  Origins  of  Puritanism   .               ...  1 

II.    Vestments  and  Ceremonies 20 

III.  The  Puritans  and  the  Hierarchy      ...  46 

IV.  Presbytery  in  Episcopacy 72 

V.    Absolutism  and  Liberty 101 

VI.    Puritanism  in  its  Triumph  and  Downfall.        .  127 

Authorities 166 

Index 158 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM 

Puritanism,  as  a  recognised  descriptive  term, 
came  into  use,  Thomas  Fuller  tells  us,  about  the  year 
1564.  But  as  there  were  reformers  before  the 
Reformation,  so  there  were  puritans  before  that 
which  has  come  to  be  regarded  as  in  a  special 
sense  the  puritan  period.  For  puritanism  was  not 
so  much  an  organised  system  as  a  religious  temper 
and  a  moral  force,  and  being  such  it  could  enter 
into  combinations  and  alliances  of  varied  kind.  It 
may  fairly  be  applied  to  Wycliffe  and  the  Lollards 
as  well  as  to  the  later  protestant  reformers  ;  to 
Hooper  and  Latimer  in  the  days  of  Edward  VI  as 
well  as  to  Cartwright  and  Travers  in  those  of 
Elizabeth ;  to  some  who  remained  within  the  pale 
of  the  English  Church  and  to  others  who  separated 
from  it.  The  name  was  not  confined  to  presbyterians 
and  congregationalists,  for  there  were  bishops  who 
may  be  described  as  distinctly  puritan  ;  nor  was  it 
to  be  identified  with  the  Calvinistic  system  of  doc- 
trine, for  Archbishop  Whitgift,  who  was  the  most 


2  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

resolute  opponent  of  the  puritans,  was,  as  his 
Lambeth  Articles  shew,  a  believer  in  predestination 
in  its  extremest  form.  The  term  came  also  to  have 
a  political  as  well  as  an  ecclesiastical  significance. 
While  in  the  sixteenth  century  it  was  descriptive  of 
the  men  bent  on  carrying  on  the  protestant  Refor- 
mation to  a  further  point,  in  the  seventeenth  century 
it  became  the  recognised  name  of  that  party  in  the 
State  which  contended  for  the  constitutional  rights 
and  liberties  of  the  people  as  against  the  encroach- 
ments of  the  Crown. 

And  even  yet  we  have  not  enumerated  all  possible 
applications.  What  an  old  writer  calls  'this  re- 
proachful word  puritan,'  was  applied  scofRngly  to 
men  who  were  regarded  as  foolishly  precise  in 
the  matter  of  forms  and  ceremonies ;  it  was  also 
applied  seriously  to  some  of  the  greatest  names  in 
our  history  and  literature — to  Cromwell  and  Milton, 
to  Baxter  and  Bunyan.  Then  it  was  but  a  step  from 
those  who  were  thought  to  be  needlessly  precise  as 
to  forms  of  worship,  to  pass  to  men  who  were  thought 
to  be  needlessly  strict  as  to  life  and  morals.  Richard 
Baxter  relates  that  his  father  was  jeered  at  as  a 
puritan,  though  a  strict  conformist  to  the  Church 
and  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  because  he  read 
the  Bible  with  his  family  on  Sunday  afternoons,  and 
refused  to  join  in  the  merry-makings  then  going  on 
round  the  maypole  wbic5b  stood  by  the  great  tree 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  3 

near  his  door.  As  was  said  by  a  writer  of  those 
days :  *  In  the  mouth  of  a  drunkard  he  is  a  puritan 
who  refuseth  his  cups  ;  in  the  mouth  of  a  swearer  he 
which  feareth  an  oath ;  in  the  mouth  of  a  libertine 
he  who  makes  any  scruple  of  common  sins.' 

Still,  while  the  name  thus  varied  in  its  appli- 
cations with  time  and  persons  and  the  course  of 
events,  we  discern  at  once  a  common  element  of 
characteristic  sort  running  through  all  the  variations. 
The  fundamental  idea  of  puritanism  in  all  its  mani- 
festations was  the  supreme  authority  of  Scripture 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  conscience  as  opposed  to 
an  unenlightened  reliance  on  the  priesthood  and  the 
outward  ordinances  of  the  Church.  The  puritan, 
whether  narrow  or  broad,  mistaken  or  enlightened, 
seemed,  to  himself  at  least,  to  be  aiming,  not  at 
singularity,  but  at  obedience  to  that  higher  spiritual 
order  prevailing  in  the  universe,  which  he  recognised 
as  being  the  expression  of  the  mind  of  God,  and 
therefore  of  more  commanding  authority  than  the 
mere  arrangements  and  requirements  of  man.  Under 
all  its  forms,  reverence  for  Scripture,  and  for  the 
sovereign  majesty  of  God,  a  severe  Inorality,  popular 
sympathies  and  a  fervent  attachment  to  the  cause  of 
civil  freedom  have  been  the  signs  and  tokens  of  the 
puritan  spirit. 

While  saying  thus  much  we  are  not  concerned  to 
deny  that  there  were  puritans  who  did  not  realise 

1—2 


4  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  greatness  of  their  own  idea.  There  were  those 
among  them  who  had  not  that  wider  conception  of 
the  action  of  the  Spirit  of  God  in  human  life  which 
leads  a  man  to  regard  scholarship,  knowledge,  art 
and  beauty  as  sacred  things ;  they  may  not  have 
always  heard  the  voice  of  God  speaking  through  the 
forces  of  history  and  in  the  facts  of  daily  life  as  well 
as  from  the  pages  of  revelation  ;  and  they  may  not 
have  sufficiently  recognised  the  developments  of 
man's  richer  nature  as  gifts  of  God,  God's  way  of 
unfolding  man  himself,  enriching  his  culture  and 
sweetening  his  life.  But  this  is  only  true  in  a 
narrow  and  limited  sense.  Both  in  the  sixteenth 
and  seventeenth  centuries  the  leaders  of  the  puritans 
were  among  the  foremost  of  their  age  in  learning 
and  intellectual  force.  They  were,  for  the  most 
part,  university  men,  and  for  culture  and  refine- 
ment of  taste  had  no  need  to  fear  comparison  with 
their  opponents  either  in  Church  or  State.  It  may 
be  true  that  there  were  small  men  among  them, 
men  bitter  and  narrow  and  rude,  but  so  there  were 
among  those  on  the  other  side ;  and  when  all 
abatements  have  been  made,  and  all  has  been  said 
that  can  be  said  in  the  way  of  caricature  and 
depreciation,  it  still  remains  true  that  the  sacred 
cause  of  liberty  owes  much  to  these  men,  and  that 
the  puritan  strain  has  entered  into  much  that  is  best 
in  our  national  life  and  literature. 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  6 

But  while  there  have  been  manifestations  of  the 
puritan  spirit  in  different  ages  and  in  varying  form, 
there  was  a  distinct  and  definite  period  in  English 
history  which  has  come  to  be  recognised  as  that  of 
Puritanism  proper.  This  was  a  period  of  a  hundred 
years,  from  the  accession  of  Queen  Elizabeth  in 
1558  to  the  death  of  Oliver  Cromwell  in  1658. 
Previous  to  the  first  of  these  dates  the  controversy 
was  between  Romanist  and  Protestant,  during  the 
century  referred  to  it  was  waged  between  Anglican 
and  Puritan,  and  we  can  trace  puritanism  taking,  as 
an  historical  movement,  a  definite  line  including  its 
rise,  development,  ascendancy,  and  ultimate  downfall. 

The  accession  of  Queen  Elizabeth  brought  the 
English  people  to  what  we  may  call  the  parting  of 
the  ways.  It  was  the  introduction  of  a  new  era 
both  for  Church  and  State.  Henry  VIII  came  to 
the  throne  in  1509,  and  Elizabeth  a  few  days  before 
the  beginning  of  1559.  During  the  half  century 
between  these  two  dates  England  was  governed  by 
three  sovereigns  of  the  House  of  Tudor  and  passed 
through  three  revolutions  in  her  national  Church 
life.  At  Henry's  accession  the  Church  in  England 
was  an  organic  portion  of  the  Western  Church,  an 
extension  into  England  of  the  one  great  Catholic 
Church  of  the  West.  Within  this  extension  the 
Pope  was  supreme  in  all  ecclesiastical  causes ;  the 
highest  Court  of  Appeal  was  at  Rome ;  the  highest 


6  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

officers  of  the  Church  were  appointed  by  the  Pope ; 
and  as  far  back  as  the  long  reign  of  Henry  III  the 
Pope  appointed  Italian  ecclesiastics  not  only  to 
English  bishoprics,  but  also  to  the  ordinary  livings 
of  the  Church.  Then,  in  1534,  came  the  Reforma- 
tion, and  the  Church  in  England  became  the  Church 
of  England.  Various  Acts  of  Parliament,  but  chiefly 
the  great  Act  of  Supremacy,  transferred  the  papal 
authority  to  the  King,  and  made  Henry  VIII,  in 
everything  but  in  name.  Pope  of  England.  It  only 
remained  for  Pope  Paul  III  to  complete  the  process, 
which  he  did  by  issuing  a  Bull  of  Excommunication 
and  deposition  against  the  King  and  his  abettors. 

There  was  an  important  difference  between  the 
way  the  Reformation  took  its  rise  in  England  and 
the  course  it  took  among  the  protestant  nations  of 
the  Continent.  In  Switzerland  and  Germany  the 
movement  began  with  the  people  ;  in  England,  on 
the  contrary,  it  took  its  rise  from  the  action  of  the 
State  as  a  decisive  movement  and,  for  the  most  part, 
spread  among  the  people  afterwards.  This  accounts 
for  the  fact  that  when  Edward  VI  came  to  the 
throne  in  1547  the  externals  of  worship  were  but 
little  changed  from  their  ancient  form.  The  altars 
in  the  churches  stood  as  of  old ;  the  priests  wore 
their  gorgeous  vestments  and  celebrated  their  masses 
as  before.  And  so  long  as  this  was  the  case  and  the 
Church  service  went  on  as  it  had  done  all  their  lives 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  7 

and  those  of  their  fathers  before  them,  the  people 
generally  troubled  their  heads  very  little  about 
changes  in  legislation.  But  Edward  VI  had  not  long 
been  king  before  new  ways  came  in.  In  the  spring 
of  1548  a  service-book  in  English  instead  of  in  Latin 
was  prepared,  and  issued  with  authority  the  following 
year.  The  first  English  Book  of  Common  Prayer  took 
the  place  of  the  Mass,  which  in  itself  was  a  momentous 
fact ;  and  stone  altars  gave  place  to  communion 
tables.  Still  further,  the  leaders  of  the  English 
Church  entered  into  close  and  friendly  relations 
with  the  ministers  of  the  Reformed  Churches  of  the 
Continent.  So  much  so,  indeed,  that  Peter  Martyr 
and  Martin  Bucer  came  over  at  Cranmer's  request 
to  assist  him  in  the  preparation  of  the  Articles  and 
in  the  revision  of  the  First  Prayer  Book  of  1549, 
preparatory  to  the  one  of  1552. 

It  was  a  revolution  again,  which  came  in  when 
in  1553  Queen  Mary  ascended  the  English  throne. 
In  her  first  proclamation  of  August  18  she  expressed 
a  wish  that  her  people  should  be  of  the  old  religion, 
'the  one  she  had  ever  professed  from  her  infancy 
hitherto.'  One  of  the  first  Acts  of  her  first  Parlia- 
ment was  the  Act  of  Repeal  which  abolished  nine 
Acts  passed  in  the  reign  of  Edward  VI,  and  restored 
the  Church  to  the  condition  in  which  it  was  at  the 
death  of  Henry  VIII.  Her  second  Act  of  Repeal, 
of  1554,  abolished  eighteen  Acts  of  Henry  relating 


8  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

to  the  Church,  and  one  of  Edward,  thus  restoring 
the  Church  to  the  condition  in  which  it  was  in  1529 
before  the  breach  with  Rome.  England  was  again 
reconciled  to  the  Papal  See,  and  received  absolution 
for  her  supposed  sin  of  departure  from  the  true 
faith.  In  meekness  and  docility  she  returned  to  the 
Roman  obedience,  and  the  power  of  the  Catholic 
clergy  became  what  it  had  been  when  the  Pope 
constituted  Henry  VIII  Defender  of  the  Faith.  But 
while  restoring  the  ancient  Church  to  its  former 
ascendancy  she  did  so  in  a  spirit  so  ruthless  that  in 
the  end  it  was  found  to  have  defeated  itself.  She 
outraged  the  better  feeling  of  the  nation  by  burning 
worthy  men  and  women  at  the  stake,  so  that  while 
she  overthrew  the  work  of  her  father  and  her 
brother,  hers  also  in  turn  came  to  be  overthrown. 
It  is  but  little  indeed  of  the  Acts  and  deeds  of  her 
government  that  took  permanent  place  in  the  Con- 
stitution or  laws  of  England.  It  has  been  truly  said 
that  her  cruelties,  her  martyr-fires  by  'the  loathing 
which  they  produced  in  the  minds  of  Englishmen 
did  more  to  establish  the  Reformation  than  any  other 
single  cause.' 

At  the  same  time  there  were  other  causes  at  work 
as  well  Even  in  the  earlier  days  of  Henry  VIII  the 
New  Learning  had  begun  to  influence  the  minds  of 
men  and  to  change  their  attitude  to  the  old  ideas. 
In  its  conflict  with  old  institutions  and  ancient  modes 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  9 

of  thought,  it  had  with  it  as  a  mighty  ally  the 
newly-discovered  power  of  the  printing  press.  A 
new  world  was  come  to  its  birth  time.  It  is  said 
that  most  of  the  young  men  of  brains  and  energy 
who  grew  to  manhood  during  Mary's  reign  were 
lapsing  from  Catholicism  and  that  educated  women 
were  falling  faster  and  further. 

There  is  one  fact  connected  with  the  reign  of 
Mary  to  which  special  attention  must  be  called  as 
being  fundamental  to  the  historical  development  of 
Puritanism.  Many  of  the  leading  men  who  had 
embraced  protestantism  in  the  reigns  of  Henry  and 
Edward  found,  as  soon  as  the  new  Queen  came  to 
the  throne,  that  England  was  no  longer  a  place  of 
safety  for  them.  Burnet  says  that  more  than  a 
thousand  of  these  men  sought  refuge  among  the 
Reformed  Churches  of  the  Continent.  Strype  adds 
that  among  these  exiles  there  were  five  bishops,  five 
deans,  four  archdeacons,  and  fifty-seven  doctors  of 
divinity  and  preachers  who  had  held  these  offices 
in  the  Church  under  Edward  VI.  It  is  to  be  noted 
that  these  men  sought  refuge  not  in  the  Lutheran 
cities  of  North  Germany  but  among  the  Zwinglian 
and  Calvinistic  peoples  of  Switzerland  and  the  Upper 
Rhine.  This  fact  is  thought  to  indicate  that  the 
English  Church  in  the  time  of  Edward  VI  was  more 
Zwinglian  than  Lutheran  in  its  view  of  the  sacra- 
ments than  is  sometimes  supposed. 


10  THE  ENGLISH  PUEITANS 

While  the  exiles  found  homes  in  various  cities, 
in  Frankfort,  Strasburg,  B^le,  Zurich  and  Geneva, 
Zurich  seems  to  have  been  their  most  important 
centre.  Here  during  the  j&ve  years  of  Mary's  ill- 
starred  reign  they  remained,  forming  friendships  of 
closest  Christian  aifection  which  have  their  record 
in  the  extensive  body  of  letters  preserved  in  the 
archives  of  the  city,  and  which  were  wi'itten  to 
BuUinger  and  other  brethren  after  their  return. 
But  what  is  more  to  our  purpose  they  were  brought 
into  close  contact  with  the  doctrines  and  discipline 
of  the  foreign  reformers.  They  were  favourably  im- 
pressed with  the  simpler  Church  polity,  to  which 
they  became  accustomed,  and  were  attracted  to  what 
seemed  to  them  the  more  scriptural  and  spiritual 
forms  of  worship.  The  impressions  thus  received 
and  the  opinions  they  then  came  to  hold  had  direct 
influence  upon  the  course  of  events  in  the  days  near 
at  hand. 

Their  time  of  return  came  at  length  when  on  the 
17th  of  November,  1558,  Mary  passed  away  and  Eliza- 
beth was  proclaimed  queen  in  her  stead.  Sandys,  who 
was  then  at  Strasburg,  heard  the  news  on  the  19th  of 
December,  and  passed  it  on  to  the  brethren  at  Zurich 
and  Geneva.  All  prepared  to  return  at  once.  The 
winter  was,  however,  unusually  severe,  the  roads  in 
places  almost  impassable,  and,  the  Rhine  being  frozen 
hard,  sailing  was  impracticable.     Those  who  started 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  11 

from  Zurich  were  no  less  than  fifty-seven  days  on 
the  return  journey.  But  rough  and  tedious  as  that 
journey  was  it  was  nevertheless  cheered  by  a  rising 
hope,  the  hope,  as  they  expressed  it,  'that  we  may 
teach  and  practise  the  true  knowledge  of  God's 
Word  which  we  have  learned  in  this  our  banish- 
ment, and  by  God's  merciful  providence  seen  in  the 
best  Reformed  Churches.'  That  is  to  say,  these 
protestant  exiles  returned  to  England  with  foreign 
ideals  in  their  minds  which  they  hoped  to  be  able 
to  realise  in  the  government  and  worship  of  the 
Enghsh  Church  at  home. 

Meantime  Elizabeth  had  been  already  welcomed 
to  the  throne  as  the  cherished  hope  of  the  protestant 
part  of  the  nation.  Young  as  she  was  she  had  seen 
strange  sides  of  life  and  gone  through  rough  ex- 
periences. Still,  she  had  embraced  the  ideas  of  the 
later  policy  of  her  father,  had  entered  into  the  spirit 
of  the  New  Learning,  and  had  expressed  approval  of 
a  reform  of  the  Church  in  accordance  with  a  fuller 
understanding  of  Scripture  and  Christian  antiquity. 
At  the  service  held  on  Christmas  Day,  and  therefore 
only  a  few  days  after  her  accession,  she  forbade  the 
elevation  of  the  Host,  and  on  Bishop  Oglethorpe, 
who  was  the  celebrant,  refusing  to  obey,  she  went 
out  after  the  reading  of  the  Gospel.  Her  feeling  was 
still  more  marked  on  the  more  important  occasion  of 
the  Coronation  Service  held  on  the  13th  of  January. 


12  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Oglethorpe  again  officiated,  again  she  commanded 
him  to  celebrate  without  the  elevation,  and  again 
he  refused.  So  she  also  took  her  own  line  of  action, 
and  just  before  the  time  when  elevation  would  take 
place  she  retired  to  her  '  traverse '  or  dressing-room. 
On  another  state  occasion,  at  the  opening  of  Par- 
liament, when  she  was  met  by  the  last  abbot  of 
Westminster  with  monks  and  candles,  she  uncere- 
moniously bade  him  '  Away  with  those  torches ;  we 
can  see  well  enough  ! ' 

Still,  in  spite  of  these  manifestations  the  more 
advanced  protestants  could  not  feel  quite  sure  of 
her.  She  had  told  De  Feria,  the  Spanish  am- 
bassador, that  she  acknowledged  the  Real  Presence 
in  the  sacrament,  and  did  now  and  then  pray  to  the 
Virgin  Mary.  On  another  occasion  also  she  ex- 
plained to  him  that  her  religion  was  that  of  all 
sensible  people  who  looked  upon  all  the  diflferences 
between  the  different  versions  of  Christianity  as 
little  more  than  a  mere  bagatelle.  The  feeling  of 
uncertainty  concerning  her  thus  created  is  reflected 
in  the  letters  from  England  preserved  in  the  archives 
of  Zurich.  One  of  the  returned  exiles,  writing  to 
a  friend  in  that  city,  says :  *  If  the  Queen  herself 
would  but  banish  the  Mass  from  her  private  chapel 
the  whole  thing  might  easily  be  got  rid  of.'  John 
Jewell,  also,  afterwards  bishop  of  Salisbury,  writes 
in  much  the  same  strain  :   '  As  to  ceremonies  and 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  13 

maskiDgs  there  is  a  little  too  much  foolery.  That 
little  silver  cross  of  ill-omened  origin  still  maintains 
its  place  in  the  Queen's  Chapel.'  In  a  further  letter 
to  Peter  Martyr  he  adds :  *  The  scenic  apparatus  of 
divine  worship  is  now  under  agitation :  and  those 
very  things  which  you  and  I  have  so  often  laughed 
at  are  now  seriously  and  solemnly  entertained  by 
certain  persons  as  if  the  Christian  religion  could  not 
exist  without  something  tawdry.  We  cannot  make 
these  fooleries  of  much  importance.' 

The  first  public  act  of  Elizabeth,  as  it  was  with 
Mary,  was  to  issue  a  proclamation  forbidding  any 
change  being  made  in  the  forms  of  worship  till 
Parliament  met  and  settled  the  future  order  by 
statute.  This  first  Parliament  of  Elizabeth's  reign 
met  on  the  25th  of  January,  1559,  and  sat  till  the 
8th  of  May,  to  begin  the  'alterations  of  religion.' 
After  restoring  to  the  Crown  the  first-fruits  and 
tenths  which  Mary  had  returned  to  the  Church,  and 
repealing  such  penal  laws  as  had  been  enacted  against 
the  service  used  under  Edward  VI  the  Houses  passed 
to  the  two  great  memorable  Acts  of  this  Parliament, 
the  Act  of  Supremacy  and  the  Act  of  Uniformity, 
the  two  pillars  on  which  the  Church  of  England  has 
rested  down  to  our  own  day.  The  Act  of  Supremacy 
repealed  Mary's  Act  of  Repeal,  and  restored  the 
ancient  Jurisdictions  and  pre-eminencies  appertaining 
to  the  Imperial  Crown,  but  with  one  important  change. 


14  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Henry  VIII  and  Edward  VI  had  each  claimed  to  be 
Supreme  Head  of  the  Church  of  England.  Elizabeth 
was  unwilling  to  be  so  described,  maintaining  as  she 
did  that  this  honour  belongs  to  Christ  and  to  Christ 
alone.  She  was  therefore  entitled  Supreme  Governor, 
the  oath  prescribed  to  be  taken  by  all  and  every 
ecclesiastical  person  being  to  the  effect  that  the 
Queen's  Highness  is  the  only  supreme  governor  of 
this  realm,  as  well  in  all  spiritual  or  ecclesiastical 
things  or  causes  as  temporal,  and  that  no  foreign 
prince  or  prelate  hath  any  ecclesiastical  or  spiritual 
authority  within  her  dominions.  Still  while  the 
Queen  renounced  the  Headship  of  the  Church  the 
Act  of  the  Submission  of  the  Clergy  was  restored 
in  full  so  that  it  was  only  the  mere  title  that  was 
renounced,  and  the  whole  power  was  reserved  to  the 
Crown.  There  was  fierce  battle  round  the  Supremacy 
Bill  for  two  whole  months,  from  February  9  till 
April  29,  but  after  renewed  debates,  changes  and 
concessions  it  was  finally  passed.  Any  person  refusing 
to  take  the  oath  prescribed  under  this  Act  was  to 
forfeit  and  lose  all  and  every  ecclesiastical  and 
spiritual  promotion,  benefit  and  office,  and  every 
temporal  and  lay  promotion  and  office  which  he 
held  at  the  time  of  refusal ;  his  emoluments  should 
cease  as  though  he  were  actually  dead. 

There  was  one  section  of  the  Act  of  Supremacy 
(1  Eliz,  cap.  i^  sec.  18)  of  profound  significance  for 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  15 

coming  time.  The  Queen  and  her  successors  were  to 
have  power,  by  letters  patent  under  the  Great  Seal 
to  appoint  commissioners  to  exercise  under  the  Crown 
all  manner  of  jurisdictions  and  to  visit,  reform,  re- 
dress, correct  and  amend  all  errors,  heresies,  and 
schisms  which  might  come  within  the  scope  of  spiritual 
or  ecclesiastical  power.  In  other  words,  while  the 
two  great  Acts  referred  to  revolutionised  the  ecclesi- 
astical constitution,  this  commission  was  to  carry  out 
the  Queen's  visitation  and  enforce  her  injunctions,  and 
that  too  without  authority  from  or  reference  to  any 
clerical  or  ecclesiastical  authority  whatsoever,  except 
that  which  pertained  to  the  Crown  itself.  These 
commissions  were  renewed  from  time  to  time,  de- 
riving their  authority  direct  from  the  Crown  under 
the  Great  Seal  and  held  responsible  not  to  the  Church 
in  any  sense,  nor  even  to  Parliament,  but  to  the  Privy 
Council.  These  commissions,  whether  temporary,  as 
in  the  case  of  the  first,  which  completed  its  task  at 
the  end  of  October,  1559,  or  permanent,  as  in  the  case 
of  the  Court  of  High  Commission  of  1583,  became 
the  recognised  mode  by  which  the  supremacy  of  the 
sovereign,  with  the  aid  of  the  Privy  Council,  was 
brought  to  bear  upon  the  government  of  the 
Church  of  England  independently  alike  of  Parlia- 
ment or  Convocation.  In  Tudor  times  the  personal 
government  of  the  Church  by  the  sovereign  was 
complete,  and  not  less   complete  under  Elizabeth 


16  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

than  under   Henry   VIII,   Edward   VI,   or   Queen 
Mary. 

The  first  Parliament  of  Elizabeth  is  memorable  in 
our  history  not  only  for  the  Act  of  Supremacy  but 
also  for  the  Act  of  Uniformity  by  which  it  was  ac- 
companied. The  reforming  party  in  the  Church  were 
agreed  as  to  doctrine  but  not  as  to  discipline  and 
ceremonies.  This  Act  was  intended  to  secure  uni- 
formity in  both.  But  it  was  found  then,  as  often 
since,  that  the  men  most  resolute  in  enforcing  uni- 
formity are  the  men  who  create  the  most  serious 
divisions.  The  first  thing  to  secure  was  the  basis  or 
standard.  Before  the  assembling  of  Parliament 
there  was  a  private  consultation  held  at  the  house 
of  Sir  Thomas  Smith  in  Cannon  Row  to  discuss  which 
Prayer  Book,  that  of  1552  or  the  one  of  1549,  should 
be  submitted  to  Parliament  for  consideration  and 
with  what  suggested  changes.  The  Service  Book  of 
1552  being  agreed  upon,  certain  changes  were  made 
therein,  probably  to  meet  the  wishes  of  the  Queen. 
In  the  Communion  Service  the  old  words  of  delivery 
were  prefixed  to  the  new ;  the  rubric  which  denied 
the  '  real  and  essential  presence '  was  left  out ;  the 
clause  in  the  Litany  which  prayed  for  deliverance 
from  the  Bishop  of  Rome  and  from  all  his  detestable 
enormities  was  also  omitted.  A  further  change  made 
at  the  instance  of  the  Queen,  a  change  most  dis- 
tasteful to  the  puritans,  was  the  introduction  of  what 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  17 

is  now  known  as  the  Ornaments  rubric,  framed  for 
the  retention  of  the  priestly  vestments  as  they  had 
been  in  1548  before  the  issue  of  the  First  Prayer  Book 
of  1549.  This  was  a  distinctly  reactionary  step  in  the 
view  of  the  more  advanced  protestants,  setting  aside 
as  it  did  the  legislation  of  1553  which  prohibited  the 
use  of  alb,  vestment  and  cope  in  the  prefatory  rubric 
to  the  Order  for  Daily  Prayer. 

The  Act  of  Uniformity,  having  thus  re-established 
the  Second  Prayer  Book  of  1552,  with  alterations  and 
additions,  as  the  recognised  order  of  public  worship, 
also  made  its  use  imperative  under  pressure  of  certain 
pains  and  penalties  which  were  certainly  not  wanting 
in  stringency.  It  provided  that  a  minister  using  any 
other  form  of  service,  or  any  other  manner  of  cele- 
brating the  Lord's  Supper,  should  for  the  first  offence 
lose  a  year's  income  and  be  imprisoned  for  six  months ; 
for  a  second  olfence  he  should  suffer  deprivation  of 
benefice,  and  for  a  third  imprisonment  for  life.  So 
far  as  the  laity  were  concerned,  absence  from  public 
worship  without  lawful  or  reasonable  excuse  brought 
the  offender  under  pain  of  the  censure  of  the  Church, 
and  subjected  him  to  a  fine  of  twelve  pence  for  the 
use  of  the  poor  of  his  parish. 

Such  were  some  of  the  provisions  of  the  Act  of 
Uniformity  which  came  into  force  on  the  24th  of  June, 
1659,  one  day  after  the  Act  of  Supremacy.  The  lines 
of  legislation  being  thus  laid  down  by  Parliament  the 

B.  8 


18  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Queen  under  the  powers  conferred  by  the  Act  of 
Supremacy  appointed  a  body  of  commissioners  to 
make  a  general  visitation  of  the  kingdom  and  see 
the  laws  carried  out.     These  commissions  were  ap- 
pointed in   companies  according  to  districts,   each 
company  consisting  of  several  noblemen  and  gentle- 
men, a  divine,  a  doctor  of  civil  law  and  one  or  more 
lawyers.     For  their  guidance  and  common  action 
certain  instructions  were  provided  which  are  known 
as  the  Injunctions  of  Elizabeth.    They  were  based  on 
the  previous  injunctions  issued  by  King  Edward  in 
1547,  and  consisted  of  fifty-three  Articles.     They 
appear  to  have  been  drawn  up  by  the  revisers  of  the 
Prayer  Book  and  were  distinctly  protestant  in  tone. 
Injunctions   2  and   18,  for    example,   ordering   the 
putting  away  of  all  the  old  paraphernalia  associated 
with  the  ancient  forms   of  worship,   and  also  the 
abolition  of  all  ecclesiastical  processions.     They  were 
intended  to  regulate  the  lives  of  the  clergy  and  the 
subjects  of  their  preaching.    All  ecclesiastical  persons 
having  cure  of  souls  were,  to  the  uttermost  of  their 
wit,  knowledge  and  learning,  to  declare  manifest  and 
open,  at  least  four  times  every  year,  that  all  foreign 
power  had  been  taken  away  and  abolished,  and  that 
the  Queen's  power  within  her  realms  is  the  highest 
power  under  God ;  they  were  forbidden  to  set  forth 
or  extol  the  dignity  of  any  images,  relics  or  miracles  ; 
and  on  other  subjects  were  to  preach  a  sermon  at 


THE  ORIGINS  OF  PURITANISM  19 

least  once  a  quarter.  They  were  to  'take  away, 
utterly  extinct  and  destroy  all  shrines,  coverings  of 
shrines,  all  tables,  candlesticks,  trindals,  and  rolls 
of  wax,  pictures,  paintings  and  all  other  monuments 
of  feigned  miracles,  pilgrimages,  idolatry  and  super- 
stition so  that  there  remain  no  memory  of  the  same.' 
As  in  recent  times  mere  children  unlearned  and  un- 
able to  read  matins  or  mass  had  been  made  priests, 
such  as  these  were  no  more  to  be  admitted  to  any 
cure  or  spiritual  function.  There  should  be  *  a  modest 
and  distinct  song  so  used  in  all  parts  of  the  common 
prayers  in  the  Church  that  the  same  may  be  as 
plainly  understanded  as  if  it  were  read  without 
singing.'  Still  'for  the  comforting  of  such  that 
delight  in  music,'  either  at  the  beginning  or  the  end 
of  common  prayer  it  may  be  permitted  that  'there 
may  be  sung  a  hymn  or  suchlike  song  to  the  praise  of 
Almighty  God  in  the  best  sort  of  melody  and  music 
that  may  be  conveniently  devised,'  but  still  so  '  that 
the  sentence  of  the  hymn  may  be  understanded  and 
perceived.'  Under  the  sanction  of  these  and  such- 
like laws,  and  guided  by  these  Injunctions,  the  com- 
missioners appointed  set  forth  in  the  summer  of  1569 
to  reform  and  reconstruct  the  religious  life  of  England 
of  their  time. 


2—2 


II 

VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES 

The  task  assigned  to  the  commissioners,  of  making 
an  ecclesiastical  visitation  through  the  various 
counties,  was  proceeded  with  soon  after  Parliament 
was  dissolved.  Jewell,  writing  to  Peter  Martyr  in 
the  month  of  August,  says :  '  I  am  on  the  point  of 
setting  out  upon  a  long  and  troublesome  commission 
for  the  establishment  of  religion  through  Reading, 
Abingdon,  Gloucester,  Bristol,  Bath,  Wells,  Exeter, 
Cornwall,  Dorset  and  Salisbury,  a  journey  of  about 
seven  hundred  miles,  and  occupying  about  four 
months.'  It  was  theirs  to  see  the  two  principal  Acts 
of  the  recent  Parliament  carried  into  practical  effect. 
The  Act  of  Supremacy  as  superseding  the  authority 
of  the  Pope  by  that  of  the  Queen  bore  mainly,  of 
course,  upon  the  Roman  Catholics  in  the  nation  who 
were  opposed  to  the  Reformation  altogether.  The 
Act  of  Uniformity  was  intended  to  regulate  and  bring 
to  one  standard  the  forms  of  worship  of  the  more 
advanced  protestants,  whose  one  desire  was  to  see 
the  Reformation  carried  further  stilL 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         21 

The  Roman  Catholic  bishops,  at  Elizabeth's  ac- 
cession had  been  greatly  reduced  in  numbers  by 
death  ;  those  Avho  remained,  with  the  single  exception 
of  Kitchin  of  LlandaflP,  resolved  to  resign  their 
positions  and  refuse  the  Oath  of  Supremacy  rather 
than  accept  the  Queen  as  governor  of  the  Church. 
Their  example  was  followed  by  an  abbot  and  an 
abbess,  four  priors,  twelve  deans,  fourteen  arch- 
deacons, sixty  canons  or  prebendaries,  and  a  hundred 
of  the  beneficed  clergy,  together  with  fifteen  heads  of 
Colleges  in  Oxford  and  Cambridge.  The  majority  of 
the  unbeneficed  clergy  took  the  oath  and  kept  their 
places  as  they  had  done  through  all  the  changes  of 
the  three  last  reigns.  It  is  calculated  that  there  were 
then  about  9400  clergy,  of  whom  only  192  refused 
the  oath.  The  vicar  of  Bray  was  the  type  of  a  class. 
Anthony  Kitchin  contrived  to  retain  possession  of 
the  bishopric  of  Llandafi*  from  1545  to  1567,  taking 
all  the  incongruous  oaths  required  by  Henry  VIII, 
Edward  VI,  Mary  and  Elizabeth — Jewell,  after  telling 
Peter  Martyr  that  Dr  Smith  the  Regius  Professor  of 
Divinity  had  now  at  last  recanted  for  the  fifth  time, 
said  to  him — *  Go  now  and  deny  transubstantiation  if 
you  can!' 

The  Act  of  Uniformity,  affecting  as  it  did  the 
Roman  Catholics  as  well  as  the  Puritans,  was  in  their 
case  carried  out  somewhat  rigorously.  In  the  case  of 
the  Queen  herself  but  little  change  was  made  in  the 


22  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

ritual  of  her  own  private  chapel.  Being  fond  of  pomp 
and  magnificence  in  worship  as  in  everything  else, 
she  would  not  part  with  the  altar  or  crucifix ;  the 
choristers  and  priests  still  appeared  in  their  copes ; 
the  altar  was  furnished  with  rich  plate,  had  gilt 
candlesticks  with  lighted  candles  and  a  massive  silver 
crucifix  in  the  midst ;  on  solemn  festivals  there  was 
special  music ;  and  the  ceremonies  observed  by  the 
knights  of  the  garter  in  their  adoration  towards  the 
altar — ceremonies  which  had  been  abolished  by  King 
Edward  and  restored  by  Queen  Mary — were  now 
retained.  So  that  the  service  in  the  Queen's  own 
chapel,  save  that  it  was  rendered  in  English  instead 
of  Latin,  was  as  showy  and  splendid  as  in  the  days 
of  the  Roman  ritual. 

But  whatever  may  have  been  Elizabeth's  own 
private  tastes  in  worship,  there  can  be  no  doubt  that 
in  the  latter  half  of  1559  the  commissioners  em- 
powered by  her  made  great  changes  in  the  London 
churches  generally,  and  especially  in  the  cathedral 
church  of  St  Paul  According  to  Strype  they  took 
eflfectual  care  to  have  all  the  instruments  and  utensils 
of  idolatry  demolished  and  destroyed,  such  as  the 
roods  with  Mary  and  John  and  the  images  of  tutelary 
saints.  They  commanded  the  prebendaries  and  arch- 
deacon to  see  that  St  Paul's  be  stripped  of  all  images 
and  idols,  and  that  in  place  of  the  altar  a  decent  table 
should  be  provided  for  the  celebration  of  the  Lord's 


VESTMEISTTS  AND  CEREMONIES         23 

Supper.  The  people,  too,  with  the  memories  of 
Smithfield  fires  strong  within  them,  joined  in  the 
crusade.  They  attended  upon  the  commissioners, 
carried  into  Cheapside,  St  Paul's  Churchyard  and 
Smithfield,  roods,  crucifixes,  the  vestments  of  the 
priests,  copes  and  surplices,  banners  and  altar-cloths, 
books  and  Good  Friday  sepulchres ;  and  all  that 
could  be  burnt  they  burnt  to  ashes. 

Turning  now  to  the  protestants  and  to  the  way  in 
which  the  Act  of  Uniformity  affected  them,  we  find 
them  already  dividing  themselves  into  two  parties 
which  we  may  describe  as  court  reformers  and 
puritans.  While  there  was  difference  between  them 
on  some  points,  on  one  point  there  was  absolute 
agreement.  They  were  both  against  toleration  ;  both 
believed  not  only  in  uniformity  but  also  in  its  en- 
forcement by  the  sword  of  the  civil  power.  What 
they  did  differ  about  was  as  to  what  was  the  standard 
of  uniformity,  the  one  side  upholding  the  Queen's 
supremacy  and  the  law  of  the  land,  the  other  the 
Scriptures  and  the  decrees  of  provincial  and  national 
synods.  The  court  party  and  the  majority  of  the 
bishops  while  admitting  that  the  Scriptures  were  a 
perfect  rule  of  faith,  contended  that  they  were  not 
also  an  authoritative  standard  of  discipline  and  church 
government,  these  matters  being  left  by  our  Lord 
and  His  Apostles  to  the  discretion  of  the  civil  magi- 
strate.   The  puritans,  on  the  contrary,  maintained 


24  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

that  in  discipline  as  well  as  in  doctrine  nothing 
should  be  imposed  as  necessary  which  could  not  be 
proved  from  Scripture.  They  held  that  what  Christ 
has  left  indifferent  man  should  not  insist  upon,  for 
we  are  bidden  to  stand  fast  in  the  liberty  wherewith 
Christ  has  made  us  free.  They  could  not  accept  as 
indifferent,  but  rejected  as  unlawful,  rites  and  cere- 
monies which,  as  experience  shewed,  tended  to 
idolatry  and  superstition.  Christ,  said  they,  is  the 
sole  lawgiver  in  His  Church,  and  such  things  as  are 
really  necessary  He  Himself  has  enjoined  to  be 
observed  to  the  end  of  the  world.  Their  own  ex- 
perience of  kingly  interference  in  matters  religious 
had  not  been  without  its  lessons.  They  could  not 
forget  Henry's  Act  of  Six  Articles,  the  whip  of  six 
strings,  as  it  was  called;  the  dread  memories  of 
Mary's  reign,  too,  were  of  painfully  recent  date  and 
the  puritans  felt  themselves  drawn  to  the  forms  of 
ecclesiastical  polity  prevailing  among  the  Reformed 
Churches  of  Switzerland  with  whom  they  had  so 
recently  enjoyed  Christian  fellowship.  Thus  in  pro- 
testantism there  was  at  this  early  stage  a  right  and  a 
left  wing,  not  unlike  the  differences  sometimes  found 
in  a  modern  political  party. 

While  the  new  Injunctions  had  made  great 
changes  in  the  forms  of  worship,  and  that  in  a 
protestant  direction,  there  was  a  provision  in  the 
30th  Article  which  caused  great  searchings  of  heart. 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         25 

This  required  that  'all  persons  admitted  into  any 
vocation  ecclesiastical,  or  into  any  society  of  learning 
in  either  of  the  Universities  should  use  and  wear 
such  habits  and  garments  and  such  square  caps  as 
were  most  commonly  or  orderly  received  in  the  last 
year  of  the  reign  of  Edward  VI.'  This  was  really 
a  revival  of  what  was  called  the  Vestiarian  Contro- 
versy, which  had  stirred  great  feeling  ever  since  the 
day  when  Hooper  on  being  made  bishop  of  Gloucester 
refused  to  wear  the  vestments  usually  worn  by  bishops 
at  their  consecration.  He  called  them  the  livery  of 
Antichrist,  and  even  obtained  the  King's  permission 
to  decline  the  bishopric  on  that  account,  only  yielding 
at  length  to  the  earnest  entreaty  of  other  bishops 
and  on  the  understanding  that  he  might  lay  the 
vestments  aside  after  wearing  them  at  his  conse- 
cration. To  him  and  to  men  of  his  mind  the  garments 
used  at  mass  were  a  significant  symbol  of  ecclesiastical 
tendency  as  the  flag  of  a  nation  is  a  significant  symbol 
of  cherished  nationality.  It  was  the  outward  and 
visible  sign  of  a  system  which,  in  their  souls,  they 
had  cast  away  from  them.  This  controversy  had 
never  really  altogether  died  out,  as  the  letters  sent 
to  friends  in  Zurich  remain  to  testify.  Jewell,  after- 
wards bishop  of  Salisbury,  tells  Peter  Martyr  that 
the  doctrine  of  the  Church  is  most  pure, '  but  as  to 
ceremonies  and  maskings  there  is  a  little  too  much 
foolery... God  alone  knows  what  wiU  be  the  issue. 


26  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

The  slow-paced  horses  retard  the  chariot.'  Sampson, 
afterwards  dean  of  Christ  Church,  asks  the  same 
friend :  *  Should  we  not  rather  quit  the  ministry  of 
the  Word  and  Sacraments,  than  that  these  relics 
of  the  Amorites  should  be  admitted?'  Thomas  Lever, 
master  of  St  John's  College,  Cambridge,  in  Edward's 
time,  writes  that  the  Injunctions  '  having  prescribed 
to  the  clergy  some  ornaments  such  as  the  mass-priests 
formerly  had  and  still  retain,  a  great  number  of  the 
clergy  are  now  resuming  similar  habits,  as  they  say, 
for  the  sake  of  obedience.'  And  finally,  Edwin  Sandys, 
afterwards  bishop  of  Worcester,  wrote  to  Martyr  in 
1560  telling  him,  among  other  things,  that  *the 
popish  vestments  remain  in  our  Church,  I  mean  the 
Copes,  which,  however,  we  hope  will  not  last  long.' 
Such  was  the  mental  attitude  of  these  men 
between  Elizabeth's  first  Parliament  in  1559  and  her 
second  Parliament  which  was  opened  on  the  12th  of 
January,  1563.  What  is  of  consequence,  however,  is 
that  at  the  same  time  with  this  second  Parliament 
there  met  also  a  Convocation  which  was  destined 
to  leave  an  enduring  mark  on  the  Church  of  England. 
It  met  at  St  Paul's,  and  under  letters  of  advice  from 
the  Queen  calling  for  a  review  of  the  doctrine  and 
discipline  of  the  Church,  proceeded  first  with  the 
subject  of  doctrine.  Archbishop  Parker,  somewhat 
elate  with  the  idea  that  the  time  had  arrived  when 
the  Church  would  be  allowed  to  legislate  for  herself, 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES  27 

opened  the  proceedings  with  the  buoyant  remark — 
'Behold  the  opportunity  come  for  reforming  the 
Church  of  England  ! '  The  first  thing  that  was  done 
was  the  carrying  through  of  a  revision  of  Cranmer's 
Articles  of  1551,  as  a  theological  guide  for  the  clergy 
in  their  public  teaching.  After  being  reduced  to  the 
number  of  thirty-nine  at  which  they  still  remain, 
these  Articles  were  sent  to  the  Queen  for  the  required 
authority  under  the  Great  Seal. 

So  far  all  was  plain  sailing,  for  on  the  matter 
of  doctrine  both  sides  were  fairly  agreed.  But  after 
this,  Convocation  proceeded  to  the  discussion  of  the 
more  thorny  question  of  rites  and  ceremonies,  and  on 
reopening  thus  the  whole  ecclesiastical  settlement  on 
its  ceremonial  side,  the  relative  strength  of  parties  was 
plainly  made  manifest.  To  begin  with,  an  overture 
was  presented,  bearing  thirty-three  signatures,  in- 
cluding those  of  five  deans,  the  provost  of  Eton,  twelve 
archdeacons,  and  fourteen  proctors  or  representatives, 
and  demanding,  among  other  things,  that  at  the 
celebration  of  the  Lord's  Supper  the  posture  of 
kneeling,  as  suggesting  the  adoration  of  the  elements, 
should  be  left  indifferent ;  that  the  sign  of  the  cross 
in  baptism  should  be  disused ;  that  the  wearing  of 
copes  and  surplices  be  abolished,  so  that  all  ministers 
should  use  *a  grave  and  comely  side^  garment'  or 
preaching   gown ;    and    that    they  should    not    be 

1  i.e.  long. 


38  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

compelled  to  wear  such  caps  and  gowns  as  the 
Romish  clergy. 

This  overture  not  being  approved,  a  motion  was 
then  brought  forward  to  the  effect  that  while  Sundays 
and  the  special  feasts  associated  with  the  events  of 
our  Saviour's  life  should  be  religiously  observed,  all 
other  holidays  should  be  abolished ;  that  in  all  parish 
churches  the  minister  in  common  prayer  should  turn 
his  face  to  the  people  ;  that  the  cross  in  baptism  be 
omitted ;  that  kneeling  at  the  sacrament  be  left  to 
the  discretion  of  the  minister ;  and  that  it  should 
suffice  if  he  wear  the  surplice  once,  provided  that  no 
minister  should  say  service  or  minister  the  sacra- 
ments but  in  comely  garment  or  habit.  After  some 
discussion  this  motion  was  carried  to  the  vote,  when 
it  appeared  there  was  a  majority  in  its  favour  by 
forty-three  against  thirty-five.  But  the  proxies  had 
then  to  be  counted  and  these  reversed  the  decision 
by  one  vote  and  only  one,  there  being  now  fifty-eight 
for  the  motion  and  fifty-nine  against.  So  that  by  the 
vote  of  one  man,  who  was  not  present  at  the  debate — 
that  'odd,  shy  man' — as  he  has  been  called,  it  was 
thus  determined  to  make  no  alteration  in  the  cere- 
monies, and  the  Court  party,  therefore,  carried  their 
point  in  that  memorable  Convocation. 

It  remained  now  to  be  seen  what  effect  this 
decision  would  have  upon  the  country  at  large. 
There  being  a  visitation  of  the  plague  in  1663,  there 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES  29 

was  not  much  done  that  year  in  the  way  of  enforcing 
uniformity  in  the  matter  of  the  vestments.  Many  of 
the  parochial  clergy  had  an  aversion  to  the  prescribed 
habits ;  sometimes  they  wore  them,  but  more  fre- 
quently they  did  not.  Occasionally  a  refractory 
minister  would  be  cited  before  the  spiritual  courts 
and  there  admonished,  and  so  the  matter  ended. 
But  at  length  more  peremptory  steps  were  taken. 
A  document  bearing  date  February  14, 1564,  was  laid 
before  the  Queen  setting  forth  the  irregularities 
prevailing  in  the  order  of  Church  service.  She  was 
greatly  incensed  by  this  report,  and  especially  that 
so  little  heed  was  paid  to  her  laws,  for  she  regarded 
the  Church  as  hers  and  held  that  in  all  matters 
pertaining  to  it  her  will  should  be  paramount.  She 
therefore  addressed  a  letter  to  the  two  archbishops 
directing  them  to  inquire  as  to  what  diversities  in 
doctrine,  rites  and  ceremonies  prevailed  among  the 
clergy,  and  to  take  effectual  methods  for  securing  an 
exact  order  and  uniformity. 

The  puritans  tried  to  avert  the  storm  they  saw  to 
be  approaching.  One  of  their  most  trusted  leaders, 
Dr  Pilkington,  the  bishop  of  Durham,  laid  their  case 
before  the  Earl  of  Leicester,  seeking  his  interest  with 
the  Queen  on  their  behalf.  He  pleaded  that  com- 
pulsion should  not  be  used  in  things  of  liberty,  and 
urged  his  lordship  to  consider  how  all  protestant 
countries  had  cast  away  popish  apparel  along  with 


30  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  Pope,  while  England  was  resolving  to  keep  to 
it  as  a  holy  relic.  He  was  sure,  he  said,  that  many 
ministers  would  rather  lose  their  livings  than  comply, 
and  that,  too,  at  a  time  when  there  was  great  scarcity 
of  teachers,  many  places  having  none  at  all.  But  all 
pleas  were  alike  unavailing.  The  Queen  gave  com- 
mand to  Archbishop  Parker  to  proceed  at  once  in 
the  enforcement  of  uniformity,  a  command  he  obeyed 
with  vigour  and  resolution.  So  much  excitement 
prevailed  that  Bishop  Jewell  in  a  sermon  preached 
at  St  Paul's  Cross  endeavoured  to  throw  oil  on  the 
troubled  waters.  He  said  he  was  not  there  to  defend 
the  prescribed  habits ;  his  purpose  was  rather  to 
shew  that  the  things  prescribed  were,  after  all,  only 
matters  of  indifference.  Still  they  were  insisted 
upon.  Under  the  title  of  'Advertisements'  Arch- 
bishop Parker  issued  certain  Articles  apparently 
without  the  royal  sanction  or  authority.  They  were 
described  as  'certain  orders  or  rules  thought  meet 
and  convenient  though  not  prescribed  as  laws  equiva- 
lent with  the  eternal  Word  of  God,  or  as  of  necessity 
binding  the  conscience,  but  as  temporal  orders,  mere 
ecclesiastical.' 

But  though  thus  mildly  described  the  Advertise- 
ments were  sufficiently  imperative.  All  licenses  for 
preaching  bearing  date  before  March  1,  1564  were  to 
be  regarded  as  void  and  of  none  effect,  but  would  be 
renewed  to  those  meet  for  office.     In  the  matter  of 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES  31 

the  vestments  it  was  ordered  that  in  cathedrals  and 
collegiate  churches  the  officiating  minister  at  the 
Communion  should  use  a  cope ;  that  deans  and 
prebends  should  wear  a  surplice  with  a  silk  hood, 
in  the  choir  ;  every  minister  saying  public  prayer 
or  administering  sacraments  should  wear  a  comely 
surplice  with  sleeves,  to  be  provided  at  the  charges 
of  the  parish.  In  their  common  apparel  abroad  all 
deans  of  cathedral  churches,  masters  of  colleges, 
archdeacons  and  other  dignitaries  having  any  eccle- 
siastical living  were  to  wear  side  gowns  with  sleeves 
straight  at  the  band  without  any  falling  cape,  and  to 
wear  tippets  of  sarcenet. 

To  some  of  the  bishops  the  enforcing  of  the 
Advertisements  proved  a  very  unwelcome  task. 
Bishop  Jewell  writing  to  his  friend  Bullinger  in  1566, 
says :  *  The  contest  about  the  surplice  is  not  yet  at 
rest  I  wish  that  all,  even  the  slightest  vestige  of 
popery  might  be  removed  from  our  churches,  and 
above  all  from  our  minds.  But  the  Queen  at  this 
time  is  unable  to  endure  the  least  alteration  in  the 
matter  of  religion.'  The  nonconforming  puritans  felt 
they  were  entitled  to  claim  that  the  bishops  in 
enforcing  the  orders  upon  their  clergy  were  doing 
80  only  under  constraint  and  not  by  conviction.  They 
were  temporising,  but  for  themselves  they  could  not 
temporise.  They  could  not  look  upon  these  vestments 
as  matters  of  indifference,  associated  as  they  had 


32  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

been  with  Romanism  and  the  evil  days  of  Mary's 
reign.  In  July,  1566,  Humphrey  and  Sampson  writing 
to  BuUinger  asked  :  '  How  can  that  habit  be  thought 
to  be  consistent  with  the  simple  ministry  of  Christ 
which  used  to  set  off  the  theatrical  pomp  of  the 
Romish  priesthood?  Our  opponents  are  the  real 
innovators.  In  Kjng  Edward's  time  the  Lord's 
Supper  was  celebrated  in  simplicity  in  many  places 
without  the  surplice.  The  cope  was  then  abrogated 
by  law  and  is  now  being  restored  after  abrogation. 
This  is  not  to  extirpate  popery  but  to  replant  it ; 
not  to  advance  in  religion  but  to  go  backward.  Why 
should  we  borrow  anything  from  popery  ?  Why 
should  we  not  agree  in  rites  as  well  as  in  doctrine 
with  the  other  Reformed  Chm'ches  ?  It  is  only  seven 
years  ago  that  we  regained  our  liberty,  why  should 
we  go  back  to  servitude  ?  There  is  danger  in  these 
practices ;  they  are  insidious ;  they  do  not  shew 
themselves  all  at  once,  but  creep  on  little  by  little. 
Why  cannot  the  bishops  endure  us  who  formerly 
bore  the  same  cross  with  them  and  who  now  preach 
the  same  Christ  ?  Why  do  they  cast  us  into  prison  ? 
Why  do  they  persecute  us  on  account  of  the  habits  ? 
Why  do  they  spoil  us  of  our  substance  and  means 
of  subsistence?'  In  this  urgent  manner  the  president 
of  Magdalen  College  and  the  dean  of  Christ  Church 
put  the  case  on  behalf  of  themselves  and  their  puritan 
brethren.    Turner,  dean  of  Bath  and  Wells,  a  man 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         33 

of  versatile  learning  and  still  remembered  as  one 
of  the  early  founders  of  science,  when  preaching  in 
his  cathedral  asked,  with  a  feeling  of  indignation  : 
'  Who  gave  the  bishops  more  authority  over  me  than 
I  over  them,  either  to  forbid  me  or  to  deprive  me, 
unless  they  have  it  from  their  holy  feither  the 
Pope  ? ' 

The  nonconforming  clergy  claimed  that  they  had 
an  equal  right  with  the  conformist  to  say  the  Church 
of  England  was  theirs.  Indeed  they  were  not  without 
hope  that  the  future  of  that  Church  would  be  with 
them.  They  remembered  that  when  the  decision  in 
Convocation  went  against  them  in  1563,  it  did  so  by 
only  one  vote,  and  that  a  proxy  vote  ;  so  that  there 
at  least  parties  proved  to  be  of  nearly  even  strength. 
And  there  were  not  wanting  signs  that  in  the  com- 
munity at  large  they  were  increasing  in  strength 
and  influence.  Among  the  laity  there  were  not  a 
few  who  were  quite  as  averse  to  the  habits  as  they 
were  themselves.  With  increasing  dislike  to  popery 
there  was  increasing  dislike  to  the  vestments,  many 
refusing  to  go  to  the  churches  where  they  were  worn. 
Even  Whitgift  recorded  that  the  clergy  who  did 
wear  them  were  sometimes  rudely  assailed  in  the 
streets  as  time-servers  and  papists  in  disguise.  There 
were  some  people  at  least  who  could  not  forget  that 
only  ten  years  ago  friends  and  neighbours  of  theirs 
had  been  burnt  at  the  stake  in  Mary's  time.    To 

B.  3 


84  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

them  therefore  the  vestments  seemed  almost  as  if 
they  were  stained  with  the  blood  of  the  martyrs. 
And  not  merely  among  the  common  people,  the 
puritans  had  reason  to  know,  there  was  sympathy 
with  them,  but  also  in  high  places,  even  in  the  Court 
itself,  with  men  like  Secretary  Cecil,  the  Earl  of 
Leicester,  Sir  Francis  Knollys  and  the  Earls  of 
Bedford  and  Warwick.  Meantime  the  archbishop 
persisted  in  his  policy  of  coercion.  Among  those 
whom  he  cited  to  Lambeth  were  Sampson  and 
Humphrey  with  whom  he  entered  into  conference 
on  the  points  at  issue.  They  afterwards  appealed 
to  him  by  letter  pleading  that  conscience  is  a  very 
tender  thing  and  all  men  cannot  look  upon  the  same 
things  as  being  indifferent.  They  also  made  their 
appeal  to  antiquity,  to  the  practice  of  the  other 
Reformed  Churches  in  their  own  day  and  even  to 
the  consciences  of  the  bishops  themselves.  It  so 
happened  that  at  the  very  time  these  conferences 
were  going  forward,  Sampson  and  Humphrey  were 
both  selected  as  the  preachers  at  St  Paul's  Cross 
during  Lent,  an  appointment  regarded  as  a  mark  of 
distinction.  The  archbishop  was  indignant,  and 
writing  to  Cecil  he  said :  '  This  appointment  is  not 
by  me  ;  by  whom  I  know  not :  either  by  the  Bishop 
of  London  or  the  Lord  Mayor.'  Being  thus  incensed 
he  had  the  two  men  before  him  again  and  peremptorily 
commanded  them  either  to  conform  or  to  leave  their 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         35 

posts.  They  merely  replied  that  their  consciences 
would  not  permit  them  to  comply  with  his  injunctions, 
come  what  might.  Upon  this  they  were  then  and 
there  committed  to  prison ;  and  as  Sampson's  deanery 
was  in  the  gift  of  the  Crown  he  was  deprived  of  his 
office  at  once.  The  same  experience  came  to  Humphrey 
somewhat  later  on.  When  he  also  was  deprived,  he 
sent  an  earnest  remonstrance  to  the  commissioners 
in  which  he  says :  '  Since  the  mass  attires  be  so 
straitly  commanded,  the  mass  itself  may  shortly  be 
looked  for.  A  sword  is  now  put  into  the  hands  of 
those  that  under  Queen  Mary  have  drawn  it  for 
popery.  The  painful  preacher  for  his  labour  is 
beaten,  the  unpreaching  prelate  offending  in  greater 
escapeth  scot-free.  The  learned  man  without  his  cap 
is  afflicted,  the  capped  man  without  learning  is  not 
touched.  Is  not  this  directly  to  break  the  laws  of 
God?  Is  not  this  to  prefer  man's  will  before  faith, 
judgement  and  mercy,  man's  traditions  before  the 
ordinances  of  God  ?  We  confess  one  faith  of  Jesus 
Christ,  we  preach  one  doctrine,  we  acknowledge  one 
ruler  in  earth  over  all  things.  Shall  we  be  used  so 
for  a  surplice?  Shall  brethren  persecute  brethren 
for  a  forked  cap  devised  of  singularity  of  him  that  is 
our  foreign  enemy?  Oh  that  ever  I  saw  this  day, 
that  ever  our  adversaries  should  laugh  to  see  brethren 
fall  together  by  the  ears  ! ' 

The  cases  of  Sampson  and  Humphrey,  leading 

3—2 


36  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Oxford  men,  came  to  a  final  issue  towards  the  end 
of  April,  1565.  Then  about  the  middle  of  October  of 
that  same  year  the  state  of  things  in  the  sister  Uni- 
versity of  Cambridge  came  under  review.  There  the 
movement  in  favour  of  the  Protestant  Reformation 
took  shape  early.  As  far  back  as  1510  Erasmus, 
after  being  at  Louvain  and  Oxford,  came  to  Cam- 
bridge in  search  of  a  new  field  of  labour,  taking  up 
his  residence,  under  Fisher's  protection,  in  Queens' 
College.  Between  1511  and  1515  he  there  wrote 
his  Novwm,  Instrumentum  which  did  much  to  pre- 
pare the  way  for  protestantism,  and  the  light  he 
kindled  was  kept  burning.  Later  on  a  little  band 
of  Cambridge  scholars  met  together  by  stealth  for 
the  discussion  of  Martin  Luther's  earlier  treatises, 
William  Tyndale,  the  ever-memorable  translator  of 
the  English  Bible,  who  was  resident  in  the  University 
from  1514  to  1521,  being  one  of  them.  A  recent  his- 
torian of  the  University  records  that  while  it  was 
the  taunt  of  their  adversaries  that  the  members  of 
this  brotherhood  were  mostly  young  men,  it  is  cei-tain 
that  they  were  among  the  most  able  and  diligent  of 
the  student  class  of  the  time,  and  their  influence 
made  numerous  converts.  He  goes  on  to  say  that 
the  best  scholarship  of  the  University  was  repre- 
sented among  them,  as  is  proved  by  the  fact  that 
when  Cardinal  Wolsey  was  founding  his  college  at 
Oxford,  and  was  for  that  purpose  selecting  from 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         37 

Cambridge  the  most  efficient  teachers  and  lecturers, 
no  fewer  than  six  out  of  the  eight  thus  chosen  were 
notable  supporters  of  the  Reformation  doctrine.  The 
leaven  had  thus  been  working  for  more  than  a 
generation  when  in  the  autumn  of  1565  the  pre- 
valence of  Puritanism  came  to  be  matter  for  serious 
inquiry.  It  arose,  first  of  all,  as  affecting  certain 
licenses  to  preach.  Pope  Alexander  VI,  during  his 
occupancy  of  the  See  of  Rome  (1492 — 1503)  granted 
to  the  University  of  Cambridge  the  privilege  of 
licensing  twelve  ministers  yearly,  to  preach  anywhere 
throughout  England  without  obtaining  license  from 
any  of  the  bishops.  These  were  licensed  under  the 
common  seal  of  the  University,  and  this  privilege  was 
renewed  in  the  letters  patent  granted  by  Queen 
Elizabeth,  and  was  retained  and  made  use  of  to 
farther  the  more  advanced  forms  of  Reformation. 
George  Withers,  one  of  the  preachers  thus  licensed, 
went  so  far  in  his  protestant  zeal  as  to  break  certain 
*  superstitious '  painted  windows  in  the  college  chapels 
on  which  the  use  of  prayers  for  the  dead  was  en- 
joined. Upon  this  he  was  summoned  to  appear 
before  the  archbishop  at  Lambeth  where  he  *  refused 
to  enter  bonds  for  wearing  of  the  cornered  cap.' 
This  led  to  further  inquiry  which  proved  conclusively 
that  nonconformity  in  the  matter  of  the  vestments 
was  more  widely  spread  in  the  University  than  had 
been  supposed.    Proceedings  were  therefore  taken 


38  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

at  once,  and,  in  expectation  of  a  proclamation  of 
enforcement,  a  petition  was  forwarded  to  Cecil,  at 
that  time  chancellor  of  the  University,  praying  him 
to  use  his  influence  with  the  Queen  that  they  might 
not  be  compelled  to  revive  a  popish  habit  which  they 
had  laid  aside.  They  took  leave  to  assure  him,  as  in 
the  presence  of  God,  that  nothing  but  reason  and 
the  quiet  enjoyment  of  their  consciences  had  led 
them  to  take  the  course  they  had  taken.  Many  in 
the  University  of  piety  and  learning,  they  said,  were 
convinced  of  the  unlawfulness  of  the  habits,  there- 
fore, if  conformity  should  be  insisted  upon,  they 
would  be  compelled  to  resign  their  positions,  and  so, 
by  rigour  and  imposition  both  religion  and  learning 
would  suffer.  The  first  of  the  signatures  to  this 
petition  was  that  of  the  vice-chancellor,  Dr  Beaumont, 
master  of  Trinity,  who  had  himself  been  one  of  the 
exiles  in  Zurich  in  Mary's  time.  Other  signatures 
were  those  of  Kelk,  master  of  Magdalene,  Hutton, 
master  of  Pembroke,  and  Longworth,  master  of 
St  John's.  Curious  to  relate  there  was  also  attached 
to  this  petition  the  signature  of  John  Whitgift,  fellow 
of  Peterhouse  and  Lady  Margaret  professor,  who  in 
after  years,  as  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  was  to  be 
the  resolute  persecutor  of  the  puritans.  This  petition 
was  ill-taken  by  the  chancellor  who  wrote  to  the 
vice-chancellor  requiring  him  to  call  together  the 
heads  of  colleges  and  let  them  know  that  if  they 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         39 

valued  Christianity,  the  honour  of  the  University,  and 
the  favour  of  the  Queen  they  must  continue  the  use 
of  the  habits. 

It  was  at  St  John's  college  that  discontent  first 
shewed  itself  in  violent  outbreak.     A  young  man 
named  Fulke  had  'lefte  of  wearing  a  square  cappe 
and  used  a  hatte,'  and  both  at  St  Mary's  and  in  the 
college  chapel  had  preached  in  strong  terms  against 
the  use  of  the  surplice.    Upon  this  the  college  was 
roused  to  a  high  pitch  of  excitement,  and  *  in  fine 
they  waxed  so  hot  that  they  could  abide  no  such 
garment  upon  them.'    The  climax  was  reached  at  a 
festival  in  October  when  Longworth,  the  master,  was 
— it  is  suggested,  intentionally — absent  from  college. 
On  Saturday  evening,  October  12,  at  the  first  tolling 
of  the  bell  for  prayers  a  number  of  the  youths  of  the 
house  rushed  into  the  chapel  without  surplices,  and 
more  than  that,  hissed  at  those  who  came  after  with 
their  surplices  on.     The  master  on  his  return  on 
hearing  of  what  had  taken  place  practically  ranged 
himself  and  the  University  on  the  side  of  the  mal- 
contents.   The  other  side  sent  in  a  set  of  articles 
accusatory  and  urged  the  chancellor  to  take  action, 
but  Cecil  was  slow  and  Longworth  seemed  quite 
indiflferent,  saying  that  he  knew  the  real  mind  of 
the  chancellor  more  than  most  people.    However,  he 
and  several  of  the  refractory  students  were  sent  for 
to  London,  but  it  came  to  the  ears  of  people  in 


40  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Cambridge  that  the  master  had  been  very  favourably 
entertained  both  by  Cecil  and  the  bishop  of  London. 
In  the  end  Cecil  drew  up  an  easy  form  of  retraction 
which  Longworth  signed  with  the  promise  that  it 
should  be  read  before  the  college  on  his  return. 
But  as  the  outbreak  spread  to  other  colleges,  and 
especially  to  Trinity,  Cecil  took  up  the  matter  more 
seriously.  He  then  wrote  to  the  vice-chancellor  de- 
scribing this  nonconformity  as  *  a  wilful  breaking  of 
common  order,  a  lewd  leprosy  of  libertines,'  and  re- 
quiring him  to  call  together  the  heads  of  houses, 
urging  them  to  unity,  and  further  recommending  that 
preachers  who  had  opposed  the  use  of  the  vestments 
should  be  inhibited  for  a  time  from  preaching  and 
lecturing.  '  Nevertheless,'  says  Neal,  '  the  University 
of  Cambridge  was  still  a  sanctuary  for  puritans.' 

The  colleges  having  been  thus  dealt  with,  the 
archbishop  began  to  devise  means  by  which  he  could 
make  London  less  puritanical.  Grindal  was  at  that 
time  bishop  of  this  important  diocese,  and  though  he 
had  himself  been  one  of  the  Zurich  exiles,  and  was  in 
sympathy  with  simpler  ways  of  worship,  yet  irregu- 
larities prevailing,  and  the  Queen's  anger  thereat, 
led  him  to  join  the  archbishop  in  his  crusade  on 
behalf  of  uniformity. 

At  this  point,  Beaumont,  the  master  of  Trinity, 
put  the  direct  question  to  Cecil  whether,  under 
the  Act,  he  had  power  to  deprive  a  man  merely 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         41 

because  he  declined  to  wear  a  surplice,  seeing  that 
that  penalty  had  not  been  attached  to  disobedience 
in  the  Queen's  Injunctions.  This  point  the  arch- 
bishop also  was  debating  in  his  mind  and  was  not 
clear  upon  it.  He  sought  legal  advice  on  this  matter 
of  deprivation,  but  got  little  guidance :  *  I  must  say 
this  much  more  that  some  lawyers  be  in  opinion  that 
it  is  hard  to  proceed  in  deprivation  having  no  more 
warrant  but  the  Queen's  Majesty's  word  of  mouth.* 
However,  after  being  much  tossed  to  and  fro  in  his 
mind  and  consulting  with  his  brother  bishops  he 
determined  to  run  the  risk.  He  would  call  before 
himself  and  the  bishop  of  London  all  pastors  and 
curates  of  the  city,  would  try  to  win  them  to  con- 
formity by  setting  forth  the  penalty  of  disobedience ; 
would  then  examine  them  one  by  one,  and  obtain,  if 
possible,  a  promise  of  conformity  in  ministration, 
testified  by  subscription  of  their  hands ;  then  to 
suspend  all  who  should  refuse.  He  felt  he  was 
taking  a  strong  course  of  action  and  was  not  without 
misgiving.  By  way  of  strengthening  his  own  waver- 
ing resolution  he  sought  the  countenance  of  eminent 
laymen  to  stand  by  him.  *We  trust,'  he  wrote  to 
Cecil,  'that  the  Queen's  Majesty  will  send  some 
honourable  to  join  with  us  two,  to  authorise  the 
rather  her  commandment  and  pleasure.'  The  day 
before  the  eventful  meeting  he  wrote  again  hoping  for 
the  presence  of  Cecil  himself,  also  for  that  of  the  Lord 


42  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Keeper  Bacon  and  the  Marquess  of  Northampton, 
inviting  them  to  dine  with  him,  and  asking  to  be 
certified  of  their  coming.  But  they  would  have 
none  of  it.  They  agreed  that  it  was  the  archbishop's 
work,  not  theirs,  and  they  resolved  to  leave  him 
to  it. 

Tuesday,  March  26,  1566,  was  the  fateful  date  on 
which  the  clergy  of  London  were  cited  to  appear  before 
Parker  and  the  bishop  of  London  at  LambetL  As 
he  could  prevail  upon  no  layman,  or  any  of  the 
nobility,  or  members  of  council  to  join  him,  he  ob- 
tained the  presence  of  the  dean  of  Westminster  and 
a  few  canonists  for  the  occasion.  In  response  to  his 
summons  about  a  hundred  and  ten  ministers  pre- 
sented themselves,  nine  or  ten  being  absent.  To 
secure  that  the  demand  he  was  about  to  make  should 
be  quite  clear  and  definite  there  was  provided  for 
their  inspection  a  clergyman  properly  dressed  accord- 
ing to  the  pattern  prescribed  by  the  regulations. 
Robert  Cole,  the  rector  of  St  Mary  le  Bow,  a  non- 
conforming minister  who  had  been  brought  to  com- 
pliance, consented  to  stand  there  to  show  how  the 
Queen  wished  them  to  be  attired  when  discharging 
their  ecclesiastical  functions.  It  is  difficult  to  re- 
strain a  smile  at  the  narrative,  for  it  reads  like  a 
passage  of  mordant  satire  from  Sartor  Resartus. 
After  some  preliminary  efforts  at  persuasion  the 
chancellor  of  the  London  diocese  became  the  spokes- 


VESTMENTS  AND  CEREMONIES         43 

man  of  the  occasion.  *  My  masters  and  the  ministers 
of  London/  said  he,  'the  Council's  pleasure  is  that 
strictly  ye  keep  the  unity  of  apparel  like  to  this  man, 
as  ye  see  him :  that  is,  a  square  cap,  a  scholar's 
gown  priestlike,  or  tippet,  and  in  the  Church  a  linen 
surplice :  and  inviolably  observe  the  rubric  of  the  Book 
of  Common  Prayer,  and  the  Queen's  Majesty's  Injunc- 
tions and  the  Book  of  Convocation.  Ye  that  will 
presently  subscribe,  write  Volo.  Those  that  will  not 
subscribe,  write  Nolo.  Be  brief:  make  no  words.' 
Some  of  them  attempted  to  speak,  'Peace,  peace,' 
said  the  chancellor.  'Apparitor,  caU  the  churches. 
Masters  answer  presently  sub  poena  contemptus : 
and  set  your  names.'  The  apparitor,  or  summoner, 
called  the  names  of  the  churches  ;  first  of  the 
peculiars  of  Canterbury ;  then  of  the  incumbents  of 
South wark  in  Winchester  diocese ;  then  of  the  London 
clergy.  Parker  writing  to  Cecil  the  same  day  told 
him  that  thirty-seven  refused  to  conform — '  of  which 
number  were  the  best  and  some  preachers.'  The  rest 
submitted.  Of  those  who  refused  he  says :  '  In  fine 
we  did  suspend  them  and  sequester  their  fruits  and 
from  all  manner  ministry.  They  showed  reasonable 
quietness  and  modesty,  otherwise  than  I  looked  for. 
I  think  some  of  them  will  come  in  when  they  shall 
feel  their  want.'  So  Archbishop  Parker  coldly  thought, 
unconsciously  measuring  himself  while  measuring 
them.    There  he  was  wrong.    They  were  resolute 


44  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Englishmen,  had  counted  the  cost  and  had  no  thought 
for  a  moment  of  returning  on  their  steps.  Not  that 
they  did  not  feel  the  consequences  keenly  :  *  We  are 
killed  in  our  souls/  said  they,  'for  that  we  cannot 
perform  in  the  singleness  of  our  hearts  this  our 
ministry.'  It  was  this  and  not  the  mere  pinch  of 
possible  bodily  want  that  touched  them.  Still  all 
must  be  faced.  *  We  have  thought  good,'  they  further 
say,  'to  yield  ourselves  into  the  hands  of  men,  to 
suffer  whatsoever  God  hath  appointed  us  to  suffer 
for  the  preferring  of  the  commandments  of  God 
and  a  clear  conscience  before  the  commandments 
of  men.... Not  despising  men,  therefore,  but  trusting 
in  God  only,  we  seek  to  serve  Him  with  a  clear  con- 
science so  long  as  we  shall  live  here,  assuring  our- 
selves that  those  things  we  shall  suffer  for  doing  so 
shall  be  a  testimony  to  the  world,  that  great  reward 
is  laid  up  for  us  in  heaven,  where  we  doubt  not  but 
to  rest  for  ever  with  them  that  have  before  our  days 
suffered  for  the  like.' 


Ill 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY 

The  separation  made  at  Lambeth  palace  between 
the  consenting  and  non-consenting  clergy  had  more 
significance  and  farther-reaching  consequences  than 
could  be  realised  at  the  time.  The  decided  action  then 
taken  by  the  authorities  of  the  Church  led  to  yet 
more  resolute  advance  on  the  part  of  the  dissentients, 
so  that  the  question  soon  came  to  be  one,  not  merely 
of  vestments  and  forms  of  ritual,  but  of  the  whole 
hierarchical  system  on  which  the  Church  was  based. 
A  dividing  line,  with  parties  ranged  on  separate 
sides,  may  be  traced  from  that  day  down  to  our 
own  times. 

Of  the  clergy  deprived  on  March  26,  1566,  some 
betook  themselves  to  the  study  and  practice  of 
medicine,  others  became  chaplains  in  the  families  of 
the  puritan  nobility  and  gentry;  some  went  north 
and  joined  the  presbyterian  Church  of  Scotland  while 
others  emigrated  to  the  Low  Countries.  It  is  to  be 
feared  that  not  a  few  were,  with  their  families,  reduced 
to  sore  straits  of  poverty.     Of  the  remainder,  not 


46  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

thus  accounted  for,  five  went  the  length  of  defying 
the  interdict  placed  upon  them,  going  to  their 
churches  and  preaching  as  aforetime.  For  this  act  of 
disobedience  they  were  summoned  before  the  Queen 
in  Council.  They  were  given  eight  days  wherein  to 
visit  their  friends,  after  which  they  were  committed 
as  prisoners  to  the  private  custody  of  certain  bishops, 
two  being  sent  to  the  bishop  of  Winchester,  two 
to  the  bishop  of  Ely,  and  one  to  the  bishop  of 
Norwich. 

The  withdrawal  of  so  many  London  ministers 
from  their  parishes  naturally  led  to  considerable 
embarrassment  in  the  conduct  of  services.  Some 
churches  had  to  be  closed,  there  being  no  one  to 
oflElciate.  To  one  church  on  Palm  Sunday  six  hundred 
persons  came  to  receive  the  Communion,  only  to  find 
the  doors  shut  against  them.  The  deprived  ministers 
on  their  part  issued  a  joint  manifesto  explanatory 
of  the  step  they  had  felt  compelled  to  take.  Among 
other  things  they  pointed  out  that  neither  the  pro- 
phets of  the  Old  Testament  nor  the  apostles  of  the 
New  were  distinguished  by  their  garments ;  that  the 
linen  vestment  was  the  mark  of  that  priesthood  of 
Aaron  which  had  been  superseded  by  Christ  and  His 
Church.  Historically  speaking,  they  maintained  that 
the  distinction  of  garments  in  the  Christian  Church 
came  in  when  antichrist  came  in ;  for  the  clergy  of 
Ravenna,  writing  to  the  emperor  in  876  A.D.  said  to 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY  47 

him:  *We  are  distinguished  fi'om  the  laity  not  by 
our  clothes  but  by  our  doctrines,  not  by  our  habits 
but  by  our  conversation.'  It  was  quite  clear,  they 
said,  that  the  vestments  in  question  had  led  to 
idolatry,  had  been  an  offence  to  weak  Christians  and 
an  encouragement  to  the  Romanists  in  the  nation; 
and  they  contended  that  supposing  these  garments 
were  indifl'erent,  which  they  did  not  admit,  that  was 
a  reason  why  they  should  not  be  made  obligatory, 
this  being  an  infringement  of  the  liberty  wherewith 
Christ  had  made  them  free.  To  this  manifesto  a 
printed  reply  was  issued  from  the  other  side  com- 
mending the  attention  of  the  seceders  to  those  words 
of  the  apostle:  'Let  every  soul  be  subject  to  the 
higher  power.' 

After  waiting  for  about  eight  weeks,  to  see  if 
there  might  be  any  relenting  on  the  part  of  the 
Queen  and  the  archbishop,  the  ministers,  and  those 
of  the  puritan  party  in  the  city  who  were  in  agree- 
ment with  them,  held  solemn  conference  together, 
in  which  after  prayer  and  serious  debate  as  to  the 
lawfulness  and  necessity  of  separation  from  the 
Established  Church,  they  came  to  the  following 
agi-eement :  '  That  since  they  could  not  have  the 
Word  of  God  preached,  nor  the  Sacraments  ad- 
ministered without  idolatrous  gear ;  and  since  there 
had  been  a  separate  congregation  in  London,  and 
another  in  Geneva  in  Mary's  time,  using  a  book  and 


48  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

order  of  Service  approved  by  Calvin,  which  was  free 
from  the  superstitions  of  the  English  Service :  there- 
fore it  was  their  duty,  in  their  present  circum- 
stances, to  break  off  from  the  public  churches,  and 
to  assemble,  as  they  had  opportunity,  in  private 
houses  or  elsewhere  to  worship  God  in  a  manner 
that  might  not  offend  against  the  light  of  their 
consciences.'  Commenting  on  the  serious  step  thus 
taken,  Strype,  the  English  Church  historian,  writes 
thus  :  '  Here  was  the  era  or  date  of  Separation :  a 
most  unhappy  event  whereby  people  of  the  same 
country,  of  the  same  religion,  and  of  the  same  judge- 
ment in  doctrine,  parted  communions ;  one  part  being 
obliged  to  go  aside  into  secret  houses  and  chambers, 
to  serve  God  by  themselves,  which  begat  strangeness 
between  neighbours.  Christians  and  Protestants.' 

It  soon  became  known  that  there  were  gatherings 
for  worship  in  woods  and  private  buildings  without 
the  habits  and  ceremonies  of  the  Church,  whereupon 
the  Queen  sent  an  urgent  message  to  the  commission 
to  take  effectual  steps  to  prevent  the  people  leaving 
their  parish  churches,  and  to  be  careful  to  warn  them 
of  the  consequences  of  frequenting  separate  conven- 
ticles. All  the  same  the  gatherings  continued  on 
through  the  winter  till  the  following  summer,  when, 
on  the  19th  of  June,  1567,  a  congregation  of  about 
a  hundred  people  being  met  in  Plumber's  Hall  for 
sermon   and   communion,   the  sheriffs  of  the  city 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERAECHY    49 

broke  in  upon  them,  taking  many  into  custody.  The 
next  day  several  of  these  were  called  to  appear 
before  Grindal,  bishop  of  London,  and  the  lord  mayor. 
The  bishop  reminded  them  that  by  these  proceed- 
ings of  theirs  they  were  in  effect  condemning  the 
Reformed  Church  of  England,  and  those  martyrs 
who  had  shed  their  blood  for  it.  To  this  one  of 
them  replied  that  they  condemned  not  others,  but 
felt  that  for  themselves  they  must  stand  to  God's 
Word.  Another — *  the  ancientest  of  them,'  added  : 
'  So  long  as  we  might  have  the  Word  freely  preached 
and  the  sacraments  administered  without  the  pre- 
ferring of  idolatrous  gear  about  it,  we  never  assembled 
together  in  houses.  But  when  it  came  to  this  that  all 
our  preachers  were  displaced  by  your  law,  so  that  we 
could  hear  none  of  them  in  any  church  by  the  space 
of  seven  or  eight  weeks,  and  were  troubled  and  com- 
manded by  your  Courts  from  day  to  day  for  not 
coming  to  our  parish  churches,  then  we  bethought  us 
what  were  best  to  do.  And  now  if  from  the  Word  of 
God  you  can  prove  we  are  wrong  we  will  yield  to  you 
and  do  open  penance  at  Paul's  Cross :  if  not  we  will 
stand  to  it  by  the  grace  of  God.'  Eventually  twenty- 
four  men  and  seven  women  were  committed  to 
Bridewell  prison  for  a  twelvemonth  and  then  re- 
leased. 

At  this  point  the  scene  shifts  from  London  to 
Cambridge  and  the  University  becomes  the  centre 


60  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

of  interest  in  the  fortunes  of  puritanism.  New  sub- 
jects begin  to  be  debated  and  new  leaders  come  to 
the  front.  Of  these  leaders  the  foremost  was  Thomas 
Cartwright,  a  fellow  of  Trinity,  who  is  described  as 
a  man  of  genius  and  one  who  would  have  been  pro- 
minent in  any  age.  Thomas  Fuller  spoke  of  his 
fame  as  that  of  *a  pure  Latinist,  accurate  Grecian, 
exact  Hebraist,'  and  Theodore  Beza  was  of  opinion 
that  he  was  the  most  learned  man  he  knew.  In  1562, 
when  he  became  a  fellow,  he  was  already  known  in  the 
University  as  an  eloquent  preacher  and  a  rising  theo- 
logical scholar.  On  the  occasion  of  Queen  Elizabeth's 
visit  to  Cambridge  in  1564  he  was  elected  to  take 
part  in  the  theological  disputation  held  in  her  pre- 
sence, and  stories  have  come  down  to  us  of  the 
enthusiasm  he  created  as  University  preacher,  the 
windows  of  St  Mary's,  it  is  said,  having  to  be  taken 
out  that  those  might  hear  without  who  could  not  find 
entrance  within.  But  what  we  are  now  more  imme- 
diately concerned  with  is  the  fact  that  when  towards 
the  end  of  1569  Dr  Cbaderton  resigned  the  Lady 
Margaret  chair  and  became  Regius  Professor  of 
Theology,  Cartwright,  at  the  age  of  thirty-four,  be- 
came his  successor.  In  the  fulfilment  of  his  oflBce 
as  Lady  Margaret  professor  he  gave  a  series  of  lectures 
on  the  early  chapters  of  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  in 
the  course  of  which  he  assailed  the  hierarchical  con- 
stitution of  the  Church.    The  position  he  took  was 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY    61 

that  nothing  should  be  established  in  the  Church  but 
what  was  enjoined  in  Scripture;  that  therefore  the 
names  and  functions  of  archbishop  and  archdeacon 
should  be  abolished,  and  that  the  lawful  ministers  of 
the  Church,  bishops  and  deacons,  should  be  reduced 
to  the  apostolic  institution — the  bishops  to  preach 
the  Word  of  God  and  pray,  while  the  deacons  had 
the  care  of  the  poor.  He  held  further  that  every 
church  ought  to  be  governed  by  its  own  minister 
and  presbyters,  not  by  the  bishop's  chancellor  or  the 
oflScial  of  the  archdeacon;  and  that  bishops  should 
not  be  created  by  the  civil  authority,  but  be  freely 
chosen  by  the  Church.  On  other  points  also  he  con- 
tended that  no  man  ought  to  be  admitted  to  the 
ministry  unless  he  was  able  to  preach ;  that  as  equal 
reverence  was  due  to  every  part  of  Scripture  and  to 
all  the  revealed  names  of  God,  there  is  no  reason 
why  the  people  should  stand  at  the  reading  of  the 
gospel,  or  bow  at  the  name  of  Jesus;  that  at  the 
Communion  it  was  as  lawful  to  sit  as  to  kneel  or 
stand ;  that  the  sign  of  the  cross  in  baptism  is  super- 
stitious; that  it  is  papistical  to  forbid  marriages  at 
certain  times  of  the  year ;  and  that  the  observation  of 
Lent  and  fasting  on  Friday  is  superstitious. 

These,  of  course,  were  startling  opinions  to  be 
uttered  from  a  professor's  chair,  or  worse,  from  the 
University  pulpit,  and  Dr  Whitgift,  then  master  of 
Trinity,  entered  into  the  lists  against  Cartwright 

4—2 


62  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

He  also  reported  his  proceedings  to  Sir  William 
Cecil,  the  chancellor,  and  eventually  in  combination 
with  the  vice-chancellor  and  other  heads  of  the 
University,  he  obtained  a  body  of  new  statutes 
giving  larger  powers.  This  was  in  the  month  of 
August,  1570.  That  same  month  Cartwright  also 
wrote  to  Cecil,  assuring  him  that  he  was  contending 
for  a  discipline  which  not  only  in  England  but  also 
in  foreign  nations  was  accompanied  by  the  daily 
prayers  of  pious  men  ;  that  what  some  men  called 
novelties  were  really  most  ancient,  and  began  with 
the  Churches  of  Christ  and  His  Apostles.  Cecil, 
never  an  extreme  churchman,  urged  on  behalf  of 
Cartwright  that  he  spoke  as  he  did,  not  from  arro- 
gance or  ill-will,  but  as  reader  of  the  Scriptures  had 
merely  given  notes  by  way  of  comparison  between 
the  orders  of  the  ministry  in  the  Apostles'  time  and 
those  of  the  present  Church  of  England.  Whitgift 
and  his  party,  however,  were  unwilling  to  take  so 
lenient  a  view,  and  under  the  increased  powers  of 
the  new  statutes,  Cartwright  was  first  deprived  of 
his  professorship  and  fellowship  and  afterwards  ex- 
pelled the  University.  In  1573  he  went  abroad  and 
became  minister  of  the  Congregation  of  English 
Merchants  at  Antwerp  and  subsequently  at  Middel- 
burg  in  Zealand. 

The  third  Parliament  of  Elizabeth,  summoned  in 
lfi7l,  sat  from  April  2  to  May  29,  when  ecclesiastical 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY    53 

matters  were  much  in  debate,  and  in  the  House  of 
Commons  there  was  a  resolute  and  active  party  in 
sympathy  with  the  puritans.  As  their  spokesman,  Mr 
Strickland,  '  an  ancient  gentleman,'  brought  in  a  Bill 
on  the  6th  of  April  for  the  further  reformation  of  the 
Church.  As  in  a  second  speech,  a  week  later,  he  was 
enforcing  the  provisions  of  this  Bill,  the  treasurer  of 
the  Queen's  household  rose  and  reminded  him  that 
all  matters  of  ceremonies  were  to  be  referred  to  the 
Queen,  and  that  for  the  House  to  meddle  with  the 
royal  prerogative  was  not  convenient.  Afterwards 
also  the  Queen  herself,  to  shew  her  displeasure  at 
Strickland's  motion,  summoned  him  before  her  pre- 
sence in  Council  and  forbade  him  the  Parliament 
House.  This  unconstitutional  invasion  of  the  liberties 
of  the  Commons  led,  however,  to  so  many  protesting 
speeches  that  the  Queen,  having  the  Tudor  instinct 
of  knowing  when  to  retreat  from  an  untenable  posi- 
tion, recalled  the  prohibition  on  the  20th  of  April.  On 
his  return  to  the  House  Strickland  proceeded  further 
and  moved  that  a  Confession  of  Faith  be  published 
with  the  authority  of  Parliament,  as  in  other  pro- 
testant  countries.  This  was  assented  to,  and  a  com- 
mittee was  appointed  which  drew  up  certain  Articles, 
which  were  really  those  of  the  Convocation  of  1562, 
with,  however,  certain  omissions.  The  archbishop 
asked  why  they  had  left  out  that  for  the  consecration 
of  bishops  and  others  relating  to  the  hierarchy  ; 


54  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Peter  Wentworth  replied  they  had  done  so  be- 
cause they  had  not  yet  made  up  their  minds  as  to 
whether  they  were  agreeable  to  the  Word  of  God 
or  not.  '  But  surely,'  said  the  archbishop,  *  in  these 
things  you  will  refer  yourselves  wholly  to  us,  the 
bishops.'  With  some  warmth  Wentworth  replied 
that  *  they  meant  to  pass  nothing  they  did  not  under- 
stand ;  for  that  would  be  to  make  the  bishops  into 
popes  :  make  you  popes  who  list  for  we  will  make 
you  none.'  On  the  1st  of  May  a  message  was  received 
from  the  Queen  concerning  this  confirmation  of  the 
Articles  of  1562:  'The  Queen's  Majesty ...  mindeth 
to  publish  these  and  have  them  executed  by  the 
bishops,  by  direction  of  her  Highness'  Regal  Autho- 
rity of  Supremacy  of  the  Church  of  England  ;  and 
not  to  have  them  dealt  in  by  Parliament'  Unmoved 
by  this  rebuke,  the  Commons,  two  days  later,  sent 
up  to  the  Lords  a  '  Bill  for  the  ministers  of  the 
Church  to  be  of  sound  religion.'  This  when  passed 
became  the  important  Act  of  13  Eliz.  cap.  xii.,  under 
which  subscription  to  the  Articles  was  first  required. 
Before  Christmas  next  following,  every  minister  under 
the  degree  of  a  bishop  was  *  to  declare  his  assent  and 
subscribe  to  all  the  Articles  of  Religion  which  only 
concern  the  confession  of  the  true  Christian  faith 
and  the  doctrine  of  the  sacraments  comprised  in  the 
book  of  1562,  and  bring  from  the  bishop,  in  writing, 
under  his  seal  authentic,  proof  of  such  assent  and 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY  55 

subscription.'  If  he  did  not  comply  within  the  given 
time,  he  *  shall  be  ipso  fojcto  deprived,  and  all  his 
ecclesiastical  promotions  shall  be  void,  as  if  he  then 
were  naturally  dead.' 

In  addition  to  the  demand  for  subscription  to  the 
Articles,  which  was  a  new  thing,  the  Commissioners 
Ecclesiastical,  when  the  parliamentary  session  was  over, 
issued  an  order  on  the  7th  of  June  to  all  churchwardens 
to  the  effect  that  they  were  in  no  wise  to  suffer  any 
minister  to  minister  any  sacrament  or  say  public 
prayers  other  than  according  to  the  Book  of  Common 
Prayer,  and  not  thus  unless  his  license  to  preach  is 
dated  after  the  Ist  of  May  last.  In  the  convocation 
of  this  year  a  Book  of  Canons  was  made,  one  of  the 
requirements  of  which  was  that  every  bishop  should, 
before  September  next,  call  before  him  all  the  clergy 
of  his  diocese,  and  require  of  them  their  faculties 
for  preaching  under  authentic  seal,  only  giving  back 
these  licenses  to  such  ministers  as  he  approved. 
Before,  however,  any  licenses  could  be  restored  the 
ecclesiastical  vestments  were  to  be  enforced.  Upon 
refusal  a  minister  was  to  resign  quietly  or  be 
deprived.  In  pursuance  of  these  orders  the  arch- 
bishop, early  in  June,  cited  some  of  the  leading 
puritans  to  Lambeth,  Lever,  Sampson,  Goodman, 
Walker  and  Wiborne  being  among  them  ;  the  same 
month  Robert  Browne,  at  that  time  chaplain  to 
the  Duke  of  Norfolk,  and  sometimes  spoken  of  since 


56  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

as  the  founder  of  the  Brownists,  was  also  cited.  In 
the  northern  province  Whittingham  and  Gilby  came 
under  observation.  Details  of  what  happened  in  all 
cases  have  not  come  down  to  us,  but  it  is  said  that 
through  the  action  of  the  commissioners  at  this  time 
about  one  hundred  ministers  suffered  deprivation. 
Browne,  Harrison,  and  others  went  beyond  sea  to 
Zealand ;  and  there  is  a  curious  document  among 
the  State  Papers  of  this  period  (1566 — 1573)  con- 
taining a  proposal  for  transplanting  the  precisians, 
to  the  number  of  3000  men,  to  Ireland,  assigning 
them  a  portion  of  Ulster,  Hhere,  as  concerning 
religion,  to  live  according  to  the  reformation  of  the 
best  churches.' 

Parliament  met  again  on  the  8th  of  May,  1572,  the 
lord  keeper  making  the  opening  speech,  in  which,  in 
the  Queen's  name,  he  recommended  the  Houses  to  see 
the  laws  relating  to  the  Church  carried  into  effect 
and  to  enact  other  laws,  if  needful,  for  that  purpose. 
Instead,  however,  of  making  new  laws  for  the  en- 
forcement of  ceremonies,  two  Bills  were  introduced 
for  their  regulation,  in  one  of  which  it  was  proposed 
to  redress  certain  grievances  complained  of  by  the 
puritans.  Both  these  Bills  passed  the  Commons  and 
were  referred  to  a  select  committee  of  both  Houses. 
The  Queen  again  resented  this  interference,  as  she 
regarded  it,  and  through  the  speaker  informed  the 
Commons  that  it  was  her  pleasure  that  no  Bills  on 


THE  PURFTANS  AISD  THE  HIERARCHY    57 

religion  should  be  received  without  previous  consent 
from  the  bishops,  and  she  commanded  that  the 
two  Bills  concerning  rites  and  ceremonies  should  be 
delivered  up.  Peter  Wentworth  again  protested 
against  this  infringement  of  the  liberty  and  free 
speech  of  Parliament.  *  Her  Majesty,'  he  said,  '  has 
forbidden  us  to  deal  with  any  matter  of  religion  till 
we  first  receive  it  from  the  bishops.  Then  there  is 
little  hope  of  reformation.  I  have  heard  an  old 
Parliament  man  say  that  the  banishment  of  the 
pope,  and  the  reforming  of  the  true  religion  had 
its  beginning  from  this  House,  not  from  the  bishops.' 
For  this  outspoken  utterance  of  his  Wentworth  was 
sent  to  the  Tower. 

It  was  at  this  time  the  puritans  entered  upon  a 
new  and  important  departure  in  their  line  of  policy. 
Having  lost  all  hope  of  eflfecting  such  reformation 
as  they  desired  by  appealing  to  the  Queen  or  the 
bishops,  they  resolved  to  make  their  appeal  to  Par- 
liament itself.  At  a  meeting  of  the  leaders  held  in 
London  it  was  resolved  to  draw  up  a  manifesto,  which 
is  now  known  as  the  First  Admonition  to  Parliament. 
It  was  published  anonymously  in  1572,  but  was  ad- 
mitted to  be  the  work  of  John  Field,  the  minister  of 
Alderbury,  in  conjunction  with  Thomas  Wilcocks ; 
and  Strype  records  that  it  was  so  eagerly  read  that 
it  went  through  four  editions  before  the  end  of  1573. 
This  manifesto  is  historically  important   as   being 


58  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

a  clear  and  delibei'ate  declaration  of  what  the  puri- 
tans had  in  view  at  this  stage  in  the  development 
of  their  scheme  of  reformation.  The  Admonition 
began  by  asserting  in  the  preface  that  till  there 
was  a  right  ministry  of  God  and  a  right  government 
of  His  Church  there  could  be  no  right  religion. 
They,  therefore,  present  for  the  godly  consideration 
of  Parliament  a  true  platform  of  a  Church  reformed. 
It  would  be  seen  that  radical  changes  were  needed, 
for  as  yet  *  we  are  scarce  come  to  the  outward  face  of 
the  same.  Those  who  were  priests  under  Henry  VIII 
and  Mary  ought  to  be  removed,  for  they  are  still 
the  Romanists  at  heart  they  always  were.  Then, 
when  better  men  are  sought,  there  ought  to  be  an 
election  of  the  minister  by  the  elders  with  the 
common  consent  of  the  whole  church.  He  should 
be  called  by  the  congregation,  not  thrust  upon  them 
by  the  bishop,  or  ordained  without  a  title,  and  should 
be  admitted  to  his  function  by  the  laying  on  of  the 
hands  of  the  eldership  only.  The  officers  of  a  church 
are  chiefly  three — ministers  or  pastors,  elders  and 
deacons.  As  for  the  elders  not  only  their  office  but 
their  very  name  has  been  removed  out  of  the  English 
Church,  and  in  their  stead  we  yet  maintain  the 
lordship  of  one  man  over  many  churches,  yea  over 
sundry  shires.  If  you  would  restore  the  Church  to 
her  ancient  officers  this  you  must  do  :  Instead  of  an 
archbishop  or  lord  bishop  you  must  make  equality 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY    59 

of  ministers  ;  instead  of  chancellors,  archdeacons, 
officials,  commissaries,  proctors,  summoners,  church- 
wardens and  such  like  you  have  to  plant  a  lawful 
and  godly  eldership.  To  these  three  jointly — 
ministers,  elders  and  deacons — is  the  whole  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  to  be  committed.  Amend 
therefore  these  abuses  and  reform  God's  Church 
and  the  Lord  is  on  your  right  hand  :  let  these  things 
alone,  and  God  who  is  a  righteous  judge  will  one  day 
call  you  to  your  reckoning.  Is  a  reformation  good 
for  France  and  can  it  be  evil  for  England  ?  Is  dis- 
cipline meet  for  Scotland  and  is  it  unprofitable  for 
this  realm  ?  The  right  government  of  the  Church 
cannot  be  separated  from  the  doctrine  of  the 
Church.' 

The  writers  were  conscious  that  the  work  Par- 
liament was  thus  called  upon  to  undertake  was  no 
light  task : — *  Your  wisdoms  have  to  remove  ad- 
vowsons,  patronages,  impropriations  and  bishops' 
authority  and  to  bring  in  the  old  and  true  election 
which  was  accustomed  to  be  made  by  the  congre- 
gation. Remove  homilies,  articles,  injunctions,  ^d 
that  prescript  order  of  service  made  out  of  the 
Mass  book  ;  take  away  the  lordship,  the  loitering, 
the  pomp,  the  idleness  and  livings  of  bishops,  but 
yet  employ  them  to  such  ends  as  they  were  in  the 
old  Church  appointed  for.' 

Such  in  brief  was  the  drift  of  the  First  Ad- 


60  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

monition,  which  produced  a  great  sensation  on  its 
appearance  in  print.  Its  authors  were  at  once 
committed  to  Newgate,  and  several  of  the  bishops 
assailed  the  book  as  foolish  as  well  as  dangerous, 
to  which  a  writer  of  the  time  replied  that  'foolish 
it  may  be,  but  it  is  stiU  unanswered,  and  though 
there  are  scarce  as  many  leaves  in  it  as  there  are 
months  past  since  it  came  forth,  it  is  fleeing  as  a 
firebrand  from  place  to  place  and  setting  all  the 
country  on  fire.'  At  length  it  was  decided  to  send 
forth  an  answer,  which  at  the  request  of  the  primate 
was  undertaken  by  Dr  Whitgift  with  the  assistance 
of  two  of  the  bishops.  This  work  has  been  described 
as  *a  learned  answer,'  and  an  'excellent  book,  con- 
taining a  very  satisfactory  vindication  of  the  Church 
of  England.'  Its  two  main  positions  are  that  we  are 
not  bound  of  necessity  to  keep  to  the  same  form  of 
church  government  as  obtained  in  the  time  of  the 
Apostles  and  that  it  is  unreasonable  to  maintain  that 
we  may  not  retain  anything  in  the  English  Church 
simply  because  it  was  to  be  found  in  the  Roman 
Church  previously.  This  reply  by  Whitgift  was 
published  in  1573,  and  called  forth  a  Second  Admo- 
nition, which  is  admitted  to  be  from  the  pen  of 
Thomas  Cartwright,  and  in  which  he  went  over 
Whitgift's  argument  point  by  point.  The  First  Ad- 
monition having  set  forth  what  should  be  reformed, 
this  points  out  how  the  work  of  reformation  ought  to 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERAIiCHY    61 

be  carried  out.  He  suggests  that  a  sufficient  main- 
tenance for  the  ministry  should  be  provided  so  that 
every  parish  may  have  a  preaching  pastor ;  and  that 
the  statutes  should  be  repealed  which  make  the 
ministry  partly  to  consist  of  lords  spiritual,  making 
one  minister  higher  than  another.  For  Christ  most 
severely  forbade  His  Apostles  and  successors  all 
claims  of  primacy  and  dominion  and  gave  an  equal 
power  and  function  to  all  the  ministers  of  the  Church. 
He  suggests  among  other  arrangements  a  series  of 
ecclesiastical  assemblies  or  conferences.  *A  con- 
ference,' he  says,  'I  call  the  meeting  of  some 
certain  ministers  and  other  brethren  to  confer  and 
exercise  themselves  in  prophesying  or  interpreting 
the  Scriptures.  At  which  conferences  any  one  or 
any  certain  of  the  brethren  are  at  the  order  of  the 
whole  to  be  employed  upon  some  affairs  of  the 
Church  ;  and  where  the  demeanours  of  the  minis- 
ters may  be  examined  and  rebuked.'  He  further 
suggests  the  setting  up  of  a  synod  provincial,  that 
is,  a  meeting  of  certain  of  the  consistory  of  every 
parish  within  a  province,  where  great  causes  of  the 
churches  which  could  not  be  ended  in  their  own 
consistories  or  conferences  shall  be  heard  and  de- 
termined. From  a  provincial  synod  there  might  be 
an  appeal  to  a  national  synod  ;  and  from  this  again 
to  a  more  general  synod  of  all  churches. 

From  these  larger  arrangements  he  passes  to 


62  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  question  of  the  local  consistory  which  there 
should  be  in  every  congregation,  consisting  of  the 
ministers  and  elders,  or  assistants  whom  the  parish 
shall  consent  upon  and  choose,  and  upon  whom, 
when  chosen,  the  minister  may  lay  his  hands  to 
testify  to  them  their  admission.  The  powers  of  the 
consistory  were  those  of  rebuke,  and,  if  need  arose, 
of  exconmiunication.  It  was  theirs  also  to  abolish 
unprofitable  ceremonies  used  in  place  of  prayer,  to 
put  a  stop  to  lewd  customs  either  in  games  or 
otherwise,  to  exercise  supervision  over  the  relief  of 
the  poor,  and  to  send  representatives  to  a  provincial 
or  national  council.  He  concludes  with  an  appeal 
to  the  Queen,  the  council,  the  nobility  and  the 
commons  to  give  the  case  a  fair  hearing  or  pro- 
cure a  free  conference  on  the  matter.  The  Queen 
especially  is  besought  to  take  the  defence  of  this 
movement  upon  her,  and  to  fortify  it  by  law.  For 
though  all  orders  should  first  of  all  be  drawn  from 
the  Book  of  God,  *yet  it  is  her  Majesty  that  by  her 
princely  authority  should  see  every  of  these  things 
put  in  practice,  and  punish  those  that  neglect  them.' 
In  these  two  Admonitions  addressed  to  Parliament 
we  have  what  may  be  described  as  the  puritans' 
platform,  the  ecclesiastical  system  they  would  have 
brought  about  in  England  if  they  could.  The  effect 
they  had  upon  the  Queen  was  to  excite  her  anger 
and  to  cause  her  to  reprimand  the  bishops  for  not 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY    63 

suppressing  these  men.  Commissions  were  appointed 
under  the  Great  Seal  in  every  shire  to  put  the  penal 
laws  into  execution  by  way  of  Oyer  and  Terminer, 
and  in  the  month  of  October  she  issued  a  procla- 
mation requiring  all  offenders  against  the  Act  of 
Uniformity  to  be  rigorously  dealt  with.  Yet  in  spite 
of  this,  and  about  the  same  time,  there  were  started 
certain  voluntary  associations  which  did  much  to 
prepare  the  minds  of  the  people  to  look  with  favour 
upon  the  puritan  discipline.  One  of  these  was  held 
in  the  town  of  Northampton  and  was  not  regarded  as 
being  contrary  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity.  Strype 
describes  it  as  *a  very  commendable  reformation 
instituted  and  established  for  Religion  and  good 
manners,'  and  tells  us  that  it  was  approved  of  by 
Dr  Scambler,  the  bishop  of  Peterborough.  The 
ministers  of  the  town,  together  with  the  mayor  and 
the  justices  of  the  county  met  and  agreed  upon 
certain  regulations  for  worship  and  discipline.  Among 
other  things  it  was  decided  that  every  Tuesday  and 
Thursday  there  should  be  a  lecture  in  the  chief 
church  of  the  town  beginning  with  the  confession 
and  ending  with  prayer  and  a  confession  of  faith; 
and  that  every  Sunday  evening  the  youth  of  the 
town  should  be  instructed  and  examined  in  a  portion 
of  Calvin's  Catechism.  Altogether  there  were  thirteen 
items  in  these  arrangements,  the  last  of  which  pro- 
vided that  excessive  ringing  of  bells  on  the  Lord's 


64  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

day  should  be  prohibited,  also  the  carrying  of  the 
bell  before  a  corpse  in  the  street,  and  bidding  prayers 
for  the  dead. 

Besides  these  voluntary  associations,  which  were 
intended  for  the  benefit  of  the  laity,  the  clergy  with 
the  approval  of  the  bishop  set  up  a  series  of  religious 
exercises  which  they  called  Prophesyings.  This  term 
took  its  rise  from  the  passage  in  1  Corinthians  xiv. 
31,  *Ye  may  all  prophecy  one  by  one,  that  all  may 
learn,  and  aU  be  comforted.'  They  were  intended  to 
advance  the  knowledge  of  the  Scriptures  among  the 
clergy  themselves,  some  of  whom  were  but  ill- 
instructed  in  sacred  learning.  They  also  conferred 
among  themselves  touching  sound  doctrine  and  good 
life  and  manners.  There  was  a  moderator  appointed 
and  three  speakers,  the  first  of  whom  after  oflfering 
prayer  should  unfold  a  given  passage  of  Scripture, 
set  aside  misapplications  and  then  make  a  practical 
reflection,  'but  not  dilate  to  a  commonplace.'  The 
president  should  then  call  upon  the  rest  of  the 
brethren  for  their  judgement  on  the  matter.  At  a 
time  when  theological  training  was  but  little  known 
we  may  well  accept  the  judgement  of  Strype,  the 
Church  historian,  on  these  gatherings  when  he  calls 
the  Prophesyings  *  a  well-minded  and  religiously  dis- 
posed combination  of  both  bishop,  magistrates  and 
people,  designed  to  stir  up  an  emulation  in  the  clergy 
to  study  the  Scriptures,  that  they  might  be  more 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY  65 

capable  of  instructing  the  people  in  Christian 
knowledge.' 

Besides  the  county  of  Northampton  these  exercises 
were  carried  on  also  in  the  diocese  of  Norwich  where 
they  were  regarded  with  favour  by  the  bishop.  But 
the  Queen  disliked  them.  They  were  not  part  of  her 
arrangement  for  the  Church,  therefore  not  to  be 
borne.  Hearing  that  the  discussions  sometimes 
turned  upon  what  was  the  scriptural  form  of  church 
government,  and  that  the  laity  had  actually  taken 
part  in  them,  she  sent  peremptory  orders  to  the  arch- 
bishop to  have  them  stopped,  Parker  communicated 
this  order  at  once  to  Parkhurst,  bishop  of  Norwich. 
But  Parkhurst,  who  had  been  one  of  the  protestant 
exiles  himself  in  Mary's  time,  and  had  considerable 
sympathy  with  puritan  ideas,  demurred.  He  said 
that  the  Prophesyings  brought  'singular  benefit  to 
the  Church  of  God,  as  well  in  the  clergy  as  in  the 
laity,  and  was  a  right  necessary  exercise  to  be  con- 
tinued, so  the  same  were  not  abused.'  One  or  two 
irregularities  had  prevailed  but  he  had  put  a  stop  to 
them,  'since  which  time  he  had  not  heard  but  all 
things  had  succeeded  quietly,  without  offence  to  any.* 
The  archbishop  chafed  at  this,  and  chafed  still  more 
when  he  discovered  that  the  bishop  of  Norwich  had 
communicated  his  order  to  certain  members  of  the 
Privy  Council  and  had  received  a  letter  from  four 
members  of  that  Council  encouraging  him  to  resist- 

B,  6 


66  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

ance.  In  this  letter  they  say  that  having  heard  '  that 
certain  good  exercises  of  Prophesying  and  ex- 
pounding of  Scriptures  at  Holt  and  other  places  in 
Norfolk  whereby  both  Speakers  and  hearers  do  profit 
much  in  the  knowledge  of  the  Word  of  God... these 
are  to  require  your  Lordship,  that  so  long  as  the 
Truth  is  godly  and  reverently  uttered  in  this 
Prophesying,  and  that  no  seditious,  heretical  or 
schismatical  doctrine  can  be  proved  to  be  taught, 
so  good  a  help  and  means  to  true  religion,  may  not 
be  hindered  and  stayed,  but  may  proceed  and  go 
forward  to  God's  glory.'  But  when  the  Queen  heard 
of  this  interference  with  what  was  really  her  own 
command,  an  enquiry  was  made  as  to  what  their 
warrant  was?  Parker's  biographer  sums  up  the 
matter  briefly  telling  us  that  another  letter  came 
from  the  archbishop  to  the  bishop  of  Norwich  which 
was  followed  immediately  by  one  from  the  bishop  of 
Norwich  to  the  chancellor  of  his  diocese,  saying  : 
'  I  am  commanded  by  my  Lord  of  Canterbury  in  the 
Queen  her  Majesty's  name,  that  the  Prophesyings 
throughout  my  diocese  should  be  suppressed,'  and 
suppressed  they  were  accordingly.  The  archbishop 
ended  the  correspondence  by  this  caustic  piece  of 
advice : — *  My  Lord,  be  not  you  led  by  fantastical 
folk.  Do  not  take  such  men  to  counsel,  as,  when 
they  have  endangered  you,  cannot  bring  you  out  of 
trouble.     Of  my  care  I  have  to  you  and  to  the 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY    67 

Diocese  I  write  thus  much.'  This  little  episode  lifts 
the  veil  for  us  for  a  moment  from  the  inner  working 
of  the  Church,  making  plain  the  fact  that  the  supreme 
and  shaping  power  was  not  the  bishops,  or  the  Privy 
Council  or  even  the  archbishop,  but  the  great  Tudor 
Queen  whose  dominion  was  absolute  and  whose  will 
was  law.  Within  eight  months  of  the  receipt  of  that 
letter  Bishop  Parkhurst  went  the  way  of  all  the  earth, 
whither,  in  three  months  time,  he  was  followed  by  the 
archbishop  himself,  upon  which  a  further  chapter  in 
the  history  of  puritan  Prophesyings  is  opened  to  us. 

On  the  death  of  Parker,  Archbishop  Grindal  was 
transferred  from  York  to  Canterbury.  But  the 
increase  of  dignity  in  his  case  meant  increase  of 
sorrow.  He  had  done  what  he  could  to  foster  the 
Prophesyings  and  to  keep  them  free  from  any  cause 
of  complaint  in  his  northern  province,  intending  to 
take  the  same  course  in  that  of  Canterbury.  This 
brought  him  into  conflict  with  the  Queen,  who  sent 
for  him.  She  was  informed,  she  said,  that  the  rites 
and  ceremonies  of  the  Church  were  not  duly  observed 
in  these  prophesyings ;  that  persons  not  lawfully 
called  to  be  ministers  exercised  in  them ;  these 
assemblies  she  maintained  were  illegal  not  being 
allowed  by  public  authority ;  the  laity  neglected 
their  business  in  going  to  these  meetings ;  in  short 
she  commanded  him  peremptorily  to  put  them  down. 
It  was  good  for  the  Church,  she  added,  to  have  but 

5—2 


68  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

few  preachers,  three  or  four  in  a  county  were  quite 
sufficient.  Now  was  he  at  a  point,  for  he  was  pain- 
fully conscious  of  the  need  of  enlightenment  on  the 
part  of  the  people.  When  he  went  to  his  northern 
province  he  was  appalled  at  their  ignorance  and 
superstition.  The  remains  of  the  old  Roman  teaching 
were  seen  in  their  customs  at  the  burial  of  the  dead, 
and  in  their  praying  with  beads.  It  seemed  to  him 
to  be  another  religion,  rather  than  that  of  the  Re- 
formed Church  of  England,  which  he  found  there.  As 
Dr  Paget,  the  present  bishop  of  Oxford,  has  well 
said  :  '  It  is  easy  to  laugh  at  the  puritan  exaltation 
of  sermons,  at  their  vehement  denunciation  of  an  un- 
preaching  ministry  ;  but  it  is  unjust  to  forget  the 
greatness  and  the  persistence  of  the  neglect  which 
they  denounced.'  Figures  and  formal  documents 
from  time  to  time  shew  the  strength  of  their  case. 
In  1561  it  was  found  that  in  the  archdeaconry  of 
London  there  were  ministers  who  held  three,  some 
four,  and  one  five,  livings  together.  Strype  reports 
that  there  was  one  minister  who  was  vicar  of 
St  Dunstan's  West  and  held  at  the  same  time  the 
following  livings :  Whiston  and  Doncaster  in  York- 
shire, Rugby  in  Warwickshire,  and  Bamet  in 
Middlesex.  And  when,  in  1586,  the  puritans  made 
a  survey  of  the  parishes  they  found  in  the  160 
parishes  of  Cornwall  only  29  preachers,  in  the  210 
of  Buckinghamshire  only  30,  in  the  335  of  Essex 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERAKCHY    69 

only  12 ;  and  altogether  in  10,000  parish  churches 
only  2000. 

Such  was  the  spiritual  destitution  of  England  at 
the  time  on  the  one  side,  and  on  the  other,  the 
resolute  determination  of  the  Queen  to  suppress 
those  studies  and  exercises  which  in  the  archbishop's 
opinion  might  go  some  way  in  providing  a  remedy. 
As  we  gather,  reading  between  the  lines  of  his  letter 
to  the  Queen  dated  December  20,  1576,  she  at  their 
personal  interview  was  passionate  and  stormful ; 
*  her  speeches  sounded  very  hardly  against  mine  own 
person,  exceedingly  dismayed  and  discomforted  me.' 
He  further  implies  that  she  would  not  listen  to  what 
he  had  to  say  in  his  own  defence — *  It  was  not  your 
Majesty's  pleasure  then,  to  hear  me  at  any  length'; 
he  therefore  gave  his  answer  in  writing.  After 
asserting  his  unchanging  loyalty,  and  the  absence 
of  any  desire  on  his  part  to  offend  her  Majesty,  he 
says  it  is  only  his  duty  to  God  which  makes  him 
refuse  to  suppress  the  preachers  and  the  exercises. 
For  public  and  continual  preaching  of  God's  word  is 
the  ordinary  means  and  instrument  of  salvation  of 
mankind  ;  by  this  the  glory  of  God  is  enlarged,  faith 
is  nom-ished  and  charity  increased.  He  has  been 
careful  only  to  admit  competent  men  to  the  office, 
no  man  professing  either  papistry  or  puritanism, 
generally  only  graduates  of  the  University,  except 
some  few  who  have  excellent  gifts  of  knowledge  in 


70  THE  ENGLISH  PUKITANS 

the  Scriptures,  joined  with  good  utterance  and  godly 
persuasion.  He  had  himself  within  six  years  pro- 
cured above  forty  learned  preachers  and  graduates 
within  the  province  of  York  besides  those  he  found 
there.  As  to  the  Prophesyings,  he  has  consulted 
other  bishops  who  think  as  he  does,  that  they  are 
a  thing  profitable  to  the  Church,  and  therefore  ex- 
pedient to  be  continued.  He  explains  at  length  what 
was  done  at  these  gatherings  and  under  what  con- 
ditions, and  gives  his  final  determination  thus : 
*I  am  forced  with  all  humility,  and  yet  plainly  to 
profess  that  I  cannot  with  safe  conscience,  and  with- 
out the  ofi*ence  of  the  Majesty  of  God,  give  my  assent 
to  the  suppressing  of  the  said  exercises.  If  it  be 
your  Majesty's  pleasure  to  remove  me  out  of  this 
place,  I  will  in  all  humility  yield  thereunto,  and 
render  again  to  your  Majesty  that  I  received  of  the 
same.  He  who  acts  against  his  conscience  builds  for 
hell.  And  what  should  I  win,  if  I  gained  (I  will  not 
say  a  bishopric,  but)  the  whole  world,  and  lose  mine 
own  soul  ? ' 

The  proud  Tudor  spirit  of  Elizabeth  resented  the 
faithfulness  of  this  English  Ambrose.  Offended  at 
this  plain  speaking  she  resolved  to  have  him  sus- 
pended and  sequestered.  As  though  she  were  arch- 
bishop herself,  setting  him  aside,  she  sent  her  own 
commandment  by  her  letters  direct  to  the  rest  of  the 
bishops,  to  put  down  these  exercises.    From  that 


THE  PURITANS  AND  THE  HIERARCHY    71 

hour  to  the  day  of  his  death,  seven  years  later,  so  far 
as  his  office  as  archbishop  was  concerned,  he  was 
practically  a  dead  man.  He  was  confined  to  his  own 
house  and  sequestered  for  six  months.  Members  of 
the  Privy  Council  pleaded  for  him,  and  the  bishops  of 
his  province  besought  his  restoration  to  office,  but  in 
vain.  At  the  end  of  the  six  months  he  was  summoned 
before  the  Star  Chamber,  and  there  lectured  and 
humiliated  for  his  disobedience.  He  still  remained 
sequestered  and  the  duties  of  his  office  were  placed 
in  commission.  There  was  some  talk  of  actual  de- 
privation, but  stopping  short  of  this  he  remained 
under  the  Queen's  displeasure  for  the  rest  of  his 
days.  As  these  seven  years  passed  slowly  away, 
blindness  came  down  upon  the  old  man,  and,  tor- 
mented as  he  was  besides  by  a  painful  disease,  he 
sighed  for  that  release  which  came  at  length  on  the 
6th  of  July,  1583,  in  his  seventy-third  year.  The 
Queen's  despotic  treatment  of  the  highest  eccle- 
siastical officer  in  the  State  is  the  most  striking 
illustration  of  that  absolute  dominion  she  exercised 
always  over  the  Church  and  by  which  she  made  it 
what  it  has  since  remained. 


IV 

PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY 

The  succession  of  Whitgift  to  Grindal  in  1583,  as 
archbishop  of  Canterbury,  had  much  to  do  with  the 
deepening  and  embitterment  of  the  puritan  conflict 
within  the  Church's  borders.  The  earlier  bishops  of 
Elizabeth's  reign,  Grindal,  Parkhurst  of  Norwich, 
Jewell  of  Salisbury,  Pilkington  of  Durham,  Sandys  of 
London,  Horn  of  Winchester,  and  Cox  of  Ely,  were 
not  unfriendly  to  puritan  ideas,  indeed,  had  the 
Queen  permitted,  would  have  made  large  concessions 
to  them.  For,  as  we  know,  they  had  themselves 
been  exiles  for  protestantism  among  the  Reformed 
Churches  of  Switzerland  and  the  Upper  Rhine. 
The  advent  of  Whitgift  to  Canterbury,  of  Aylmer 
to  London  and  Freke  to  Norwich,  meant  more  than 
an  ordinary  change  in  the  episcopate.  It  meant  that 
the  Queen  had  now  those  to  her  hand  who  would 
readily  work  her  will.  There  was  a  time  when  it 
seemed  as  if  Whitgift  would  have  thrown  in  his  lot 
with  the  puritan  party.  For  in  1665,  as  fellow  of 
Trinity  and  Lady  Margaret  professor  he  signed  the 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    73 

petition  to  the  chancellor  against  the  revival  of  the 
papal  vestments.  But  when  in  1569  Cartwright 
created  a  stir  in  the  University  by  assailing  the 
hierarchical  constitution  of  the  Church,  he  at  once 
entered  the  lists  against  him,  reported  his  teachings 
to  the  chancellor,  and  joined  the  movement  for 
obtaining  new  statutes,  under  the  powers  of  which 
Cartwright  was  deprived  of  his  Lectureship  and 
expelled  the  University.  In  1571,  again,  he  was 
chosen  to  reply  to  the  First  Admonition  of  Field  and 
Wilcocks,  and  also  to  the  Second  by  Cartwright. 

Thus  when  Whitgift  came  to  be  archbishop  he 
was  already  in  fiill  sympathy  with  the  Queen  in  her 
dislike  of  puritan  ideas.  He  was  with  her  also  in 
her  love  of  pomp  and  stately  show.  No  ecclesiastic 
since  Cardinal  Wolsey  had  departed  so  far  from 
puritan  simplicity  of  life.  Sir  George  Paule,  the 
comptroller  of  his  household,  tells  us  that  *  he  had  a 
desire  always  to  keep  a  great  and  bountiful  House,' 
that  'upon  some  chief  Festival  days  he  was  served 
with  great  solemnity  upon  the  knee  for  the  upholding 
of  the  state  that  belonged  unto  his  place.'  He  relates 
also  how  that '  at  his  first  journey  into  Kent  he  rode 
to  Dover  being  attended  by  at  least  a  hundred  of  his 
own  servants  in  livery,  whereof  there  were  forty 
gentlemen  in  chains  of  gold.'  He  further  tells  us 
that  as  every  third  year  he  rode  into  Kent  he  was 
not  only  attended  by  his  own  train  of  two  hundred 


74  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

persons,  but  also  with  the  gentlemen  of  the  county, 
so  'that  he  did  sometimes  ride  into  the  city  of 
Canterbury  and  into  other  towns  with  eight  hundred 
or  a  thousand  Horse.' 

On  his  advancement  to  his  new  position  the  Queen 
charged  him  to  restore  the  discipline  of  the  Church 
and  the  Uniformity  established  by  law  which,  said 
she,  'through  the  connivance  of  some  prelates,  the 
obstinacy  of  the  puritans  and  the  power  of  some 
noblemen  is  run  out  of  square.'  He  readily  fell  into 
line  with  the  royal  wishes.  The  week  after  his 
confirmation  at  Lambeth  he  issued  to  the  bishops 
of  his  province  certain  Articles  which  were  aimed 
both  against  recusants  and  puritans.  Those  specially 
bearing  upon  the  latter  required,  (1)  That  none  be 
permitted  to  read  and  preach  and  catechise  in  the 
Church  unless  he  do,  four  times  a  year  at  least, 
minister  the  sacraments  according  to  the  Book  of 
Conamon  Prayer ;  (2)  That  all  preachers  do  at  all 
times  wear  and  use  such  kind  of  apparel  as  is  pre- 
scribed by  the  Book  of  Advertisements  and  her 
Majesty's  Injunctions ;  and  (3)  That  none  be  admitted 
unless  he  subscribe  Articles  (a)  asserting  the  Queen's 
supremacy  over  all  causes  ecclesiastical  as  well  as 
civil ;  (b)  declaring  that  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer 
contains  nothing  contrary  to  the  Word  of  God,  he 
promising  to  use  no  other  form  of  service ;  and(c)  avow- 
ing acceptance  of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles  of  1662. 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    75 

After  the  promulgation  of  these  Articles  the 
archbishop  carried  out  a  Metropolitical  Visitation 
to  see  them  enforced.  The  first  appearance  of  serious 
opposition  was  in  his  own  diocese  of  Kent  where 
some  twenty  ministers  refused  to  subscribe.  They 
were  willing,  they  said,  to  subscribe  to  the  Prayer 
Book,  so  far  as  it  was  not  contrary  to  the  Word 
of  God,  but  they  were  not  prepared  to  say  there  was 
nothing  in  the  book  contrary  thereto,  and  they 
proceeded  to  indicate  several  things  they  regarded 
as  imperfect  They  also  stated  their  objections  to 
the  observance  of  Saints'  Days,  and  to  the  public 
reading  of  the  Apocrypha,  and  they  desired  that  the 
attire  of  ministers  might  be  as  in  the  second  year 
of  Edward  VI.  They  further  thought  that  the  length 
of  the  Litany  unduly  hindered  the  sermon,  that  the 
prayers  were  over  long,  and  they  could  not  agree 
that  children  were  really  regenerated  and  necessarily 
saved  by  being  baptized.  On  matters  of  church 
polity  also  they  held  equally  decided  views,  objecting 
to  the  creation  of  superior  clergy,  and  contending 
that  archbishops,  bishops  and  priests  were  inventions 
of  men,  the  practical  effect  of  which  was  to  deface 
the  true  Word  of  God.  They  noted  the  omission 
of  Elders  such  as  those  recognised  in  the  New 
Testament,  and  contended  that  the  people  in  every 
church  ought  to  have  right  and  liberty  to  choose 
their  own  ministers.    Notwithstanding  this  statement 


76  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

of  their  views,  however,  they  were  still  called  upon  to 
subscribe  the  new  Articles,  and  refusing  to  do  so,  were 
pronounced  contumacious,  and  required  to  answer  at 
law  in  February  following. 

The  same  proceedings  occurred  elsewhere.  In 
Norfolk  alone,  64  parish  ministers  were  suspended, 
and  in  Suffolk  60.  In  the  six  counties  of  Norfolk, 
Suffolk,  Essex,  Kent,  Lincoln  and  Sussex,  no  fewer 
than  233  of  the  clergy  were  placed  under  interdict ; 
those  in  Kent  making  formal  appeal  to  the  Privy 
Council  against  the  archbishop's  decision.  There 
was  also  another  part  of  his  administration  against 
which  serious  protest  was  made.  In  December,  1583, 
he  established  in  more  permanent  and  oppressive 
form  the  Court  of  High  Commission,  whose  methods 
of  investigation  were  described  as  worthy  only  of  the 
Spanish  Inquisition.  A  man  might  be  called  before 
this  Court,  without  a  charge  and  without  an  accuser, 
and  there  have  the  Oath  ex  officio  administered  to 
him,  compelling  him  to  reveal  whatsoever  he  knew, 
whether  of  himself  or  anyone  else.  If  he  refused  the 
oath  he  was  at  once  committed  to  prison,  simply  for 
refusing.  The  names  are  given  of  twenty-five  men 
confined  in  the  gaols  of  London  for  ecclesiastical 
offences,  who  were  there  without  warrant,  and  for 
months  together  without  trial.  They  were  treated 
as  convicted  criminals,  were  sometimes  cruelly  beaten 
and  cast  into  '  Little  Ease,'  and  some  of  them  died  in 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    n 

prison.  This  Court  went  on  its  evil  way  for  half 
a  century  and  more.  It  trespassed  on  competing 
jurisdictions,  became  in  time  one  of  the  chief  engines 
of  Archbishop  Laud's  oppressions,  and  lasting  on  till 
the  Long  Parliament,  was  finally  abolished  by  an  Act 
with  this  ignominious  clause — 'that  no  such  juris- 
diction should  be  revived  for  the  future  in  any  Court 
whatsoever.' 

The  year  after  the  enlargement  of  the  powers 
of  the  High  Commission  a  series  of  searching  Inter- 
rogatories was  drawn  up  at  Lambeth  for  the  purpose 
of  ascertaining  how  far  the  clergy  were,  or  were  not, 
obedient  to  the  Act  of  Uniformity.  They  were  twenty- 
four  in  all,  covered  every  conceivable  aspect  of  church 
life,  and  were  so  minute  that  it  was  next  to  impossible 
for  a  man  to  escape  censure  or  conviction.  Several 
of  the  clergy  brought  these  questions  to  the  notice  of 
the  Lord  Treasurer  whom  they  had  come  to  look 
upon  as  their  friend.  At  once  he  wrote  to  the 
archbishop  protesting :  *  I  have  read  these  Articles 
of  Enquiry,'  he  said,  'and  find  them  so  curiously 
penned,  so  full  of  branches  and  circumstances,  as 
I  think  the  Inquisition  of  Spain  use  not  so  many 
questions  to  comprehend  and  entrap  their  preyes... 
My  good  Lord,  bear  with  my  scribbling.  I  desire 
the  peace  of  the  Church.  I  desire  concord  and  unity 
in  the  exercise  of  our  Religion.  According  to  my 
simple  judgement  this  kind  of  proceeding  savours  too 


78  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

much  of  the  Romish  Inquisition,  and  is  rather  a 
device  to  seek  for  offenders  than  to  reform  any.' 

While  the  archbishop  was  thus  enforcing  sub- 
scription and  multiplying  Interrogatories  against  the 
puritans,  they  on  their  part  were  preparing  to  carry 
out  more  effectually  a  plan  of  campaign  for  securing 
the  changes  and  reforms  they  deemed  to  be  so 
needful  for  the  spiritual  welfare  of  the  Church.  They 
had  no  intention  of  separating  from  the  Church. 
That  was  far  indeed  from  their  purpose,  which  was 
rather  to  bring  about  from  within  such  changes  as 
would  make  its  government  conform  more  nearly  to 
what  they  regarded  as  the  Scriptural  idea.  According 
to  Thomas  Fuller  their  '  grand  design  was  to  set  up 
a  discipline  within  a  discipline,  Presbytery  in  Episco- 
pacy.' The  hierarchical  system  seemed  to  them  to 
be  foreign  to  New  Testament  teaching,  and  their 
object  was  to  substitute  a  government  of  pastors  and 
ruling  elders  for  that  of  archbishops  and  bishops, 
chancellors  and  archdeacons  ;  and  also  to  organise 
the  parishes  of  England  into  a  connected  system  of 
presbyteries,  synods,  and  assemblies  provincial  and 
general. 

To  us,  after  centuries  of  established  episcopacy, 
this  scheme  of  theirs  would  have  seemed  daring  and 
impossible.  But  not  so  to  them.  They  were  within 
fifty  years  of  the  time  when  a  far  greater  revolution 
had  been  possible ;   when  the  English  Church  was 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    79 

first  severed  from  the  See  of  Rome,  and  its  bishops 
from  the  authority  of  the  pope.  In  the  eyes  of  all 
Europe  that  was  a  tremendous  step  to  take,  yet  it 
was  taken.  It  was  taken  again  on  the  Accession  of 
Elizabeth,  and  in  1570  confirmed  by  her  solemn  and 
formal  excommunication,  and  that  of  her  clergy,  by 
the  Bull  of  Pope  Pius  V.  So  that  though  the  bishops 
were  still  there,  their  allegiance  to  the  pope  was  no 
more.  Whence  then  did  they  derive  their  authority? 
It  was  certainly  not  from  the  Scriptures,  for  there 
bishop  and  presbyter  were  equivalent  terms  denoting 
equality  of  rank.  And  it  is  further  to  be  specially 
noted  that  up  to  this  time  the  claim  of  divine  right 
for  Episcopacy  had  not  been  even  suggested,  much 
less  formulated.  It  was  Dr  Bancroft,  in  his  sermon 
at  St  Paul's  Cross  in  1588,  who  first  put  forward  this 
claim,  and  then  rather  as  a  counterclaim  to  that  of 
the  presbyterians  who  asserted  divine  right  for  their 
system.  And  when  it  was  put  forward,  even  the 
archbishop  himself  said  he  wished  he  could  believe 
it,  which  he  evidently  did  not.  To  shew  the  novelty 
of  the  claim,  we  find  Lord  Burleigh  referring  the 
matter  to  Dr  Hammond,  chancellor  of  the  diocese 
of  London  for  his  opinion.  His  reply  under  date 
November  4,  1588,  has  been  preserved  among  the 
Cecil  MSS.  in  which  he  says  that  the  name  of  a 
bishop,  as  of  an  office  having  superiority  over  many 
churches  is  not  to  be  found  in  the  Scriptures,  the 


80  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

names  of  episcopus  and  presbyter  importing  one 
function.  He  concludes  with  these  decisive  words : 
'The  Bysshopps  of  our  realm  do  not  (so  farre  as 
I  ever  yet  hearde),  nor  may  not,  clayme  to  themselves 
any  other  authorytie  than  is  geeven  them  by  the 
statute  of  the  25  of  Kynge  Henry  the  8,  recited 
in  the  fyrst  yeare  of  her  Majesty's  raygne,  neither 
is  it  reasonable  they  should  make  other  clayme,  for 
if  it  had  pleased  her  Majesty,  with  the  wysdome  of 
the  realme  to  have  used  no  bysshopps  at  all,  we 
could  not  have  complayned  justly  of  any  defect  in 
our  Churche.'  If  such  were  the  views  of  leading 
churchmen  at  that  time,  it  is  not  surprising  if  men 
with  puritan  ideas  felt  themselves  justified  in  thinking 
that  ruling  elders  or  presbyters  might  be  substituted 
for  bishops  without  any  great  violation  of  the  spiritual 
order  of  the  universe.  Moreover  the  Church  of 
England,  since  the  Reformation,  had  regarded  the 
Reformed  Churches  of  the  Continent  as  Sister 
Churches,  and  they  had  no  bishops.  And,  what  was 
still  more  to  the  purpose,  Scotland  also,  under  the 
influence  of  John  Knox,  had  quite  recently  set 
aside  episcopacy  altogether,  and  established  presby- 
terianism  as  the  national  form  of  church  govern- 
ment. 

These  were  weighty  considerations,  'but,'  to  quote 
the  earnest  words  of  Dr  Paget,  the  present  bishop  of 
Oxford,  'nothing  surely,  can  have  contributed  so 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    81 

much  to  the  opportunities,  the  power,  the  zeal,  the 
hopes  of  puritans  as  did  the  neglect  of  duty  in  the 
Church.  At  such  a  time  ignorance  and  inability 
among  the  clergy  were  serious  enough,  but  avarice 
and  plain  indiflference  to  the  meaning  of  a  spiritual 
change  were  far  worse.'  There  was  many  'a  parish 
whose  minister  could  only  struggle  through  the 
service,  never  preached,  but  read,  perhaps  four 
purchased  sermons  in  the  course  of  the  year,  or,  it 
may  be,  had  never  resided  in  the  place  at  all,  and, 
had  he  done  so,  might  only  have  made  matters  worse 
by  the  example  of  his  vicious  life.' 

It  will  be  remembered  that  the  puritan  scheme 
had  been  set  forth  by  Field  and  Wilcocks  in  the 
First  Admonition  to  Parliament  of  1572.  Two  years 
later  there  appeared  a  yet  more  important  and 
scholarly  treatise,  the  famous  Ecclesiasticae  Disci- 
plinae  et  Anglicanae  Eccle8iae...explicatio.  This 
work  was  first  printed  anonymously  at  Rochelle, 
a  city  which  after  the  Huguenot  Massacre  of  1672 
became  the  chief  rendezvous  of  the  French  protestants, 
and  where  freedom  of  worship  had  been  secured  by 
treaty.  Though  issued  without  author's  name  it  was 
known  to  be  the  production  of  Walter  Travers,  a 
fellow  of  Trinity,  who  after  residing  abroad  became 
domestic  chaplain  to  Lord  Burghley  and  tutor  to  his 
son  Robert  CecD.  In  1581,  on  his  lordship's  recom- 
mendation he  was  appointed  Afternoon  Lecturer  at 

B-  6 


82  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  Temple  Church,  and  by  arrangement  of  the 
Benchers  remained  in  this  position  after  Richard 
Hooker  was  appointed  Master.  The  writer  of  Hooker's 
Life  reports  that  the  morning  sermon  spoke  the 
language  of  Canterbury,  the  afternoon  that  of  Geneva. 
The  church  was  crowded  by  lawyers  deeply  interested 
in  the  controversy,  and,  as  Thomas  Fuller  tells  us, 
*Some  say  the  congregation  ebbed  in  the  morning 
and  flowed  in  the  afternoon,'  till  a  prohibition  was 
served  upon  Travers  in  1686.  This  man,  then,  was 
the  author  of  the  Ecdesiastica  DisdpUna,  the  most 
memorable  book  on  the  puritan  side.  It  originally 
appeared  in  1674  in  two  forms,  Latin  and  English, 
and  a  second  edition  of  the  English  translation  was 
printed  in  Geneva  in  1580.  The  more  important  and 
conspicuous  issue  of  the  book,  however,  was  in  1584, 
the  year  of  Whitgift's  Articles  and  Interrogatories. 
In  that  year,  after  more  than  fifty  years  of  abeyance, 
the  Cambridge  University  Press  was  re-established, 
and  one  of  its  earliest  issues  was  a  revised  English 
version  of  this  treatise  by  Travera  On  this  Whitglft 
took  alarm  and  on  the  30th  of  June  wrote  to  the 
chancellor  in  earnest  remonstrance.  'Ever  since 
they  had  a  Printing  Press  in  Cambridge  he  greatly 
feared,'  he  said,  'that  this  and  such  inconveniences 
would  follow.'  At  his  instigation  the  greater  part 
of  the  printed  impression  was  seized  and  destroyed. 
Still  to  some  extent  the  book  got  into  circulation 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    83 

and  apart  from  its  importance  as  the  puritan  manifesto, 
from  a  literary  point  of  view  it  has  historical  signi- 
ficance as  being  the  treatise  to  which  Hooker's  great 
work  on  Ecclesiastical  Polity  was  written  as  a  reply. 
The  purpose  of  Travers  was  to  discuss  the  proper 
calling,  conduct,  knowledge,  apparel  and  maintenance 
of  a  minister  of  religion  ;  the  offices  of  the  doctor 
or  teacher,  the  bishops,  pastors  and  elders,  and  also 
the  functions  of  the  consistory.  He  began  by  shewing 
the  interdependence  of  doctrine  and  discipline.  The 
danger  of  the  Church  of  England,  he  maintained,  was 
that  doctrine  was  severed  from  discipline,  and  as 
a  consequence  the  reformation  thus  far  effected  was 
incomplete  and  insecure ;  discipline  being  left  un- 
reformed,  the  reform  of  doctrine  was  precarious. 
What  was  needed  now,  therefore,  was  a  new  re- 
formation dealing  with  the  discipline  of  the  Church. 
And  the  first  thing  to  be  done  was  to  make  a  clean 
sweep  of  the  Canon  Law  out  of  which  (as  out  of 
a  Trojan  horse)  have  come  archbishops,  lord  bishops, 
chancellors,  archdeacons  and  the  like,  by  whom  the 
Church  has  been  taken  and  enslaved.  This  accom- 
plished, then  let  the  true  and  right  discipline  be 
established,  based  upon  the  one  essential  principle 
of  Puritanism  which  is  that  the  Word  of  God  is  to  be 
the  authority,  and  that  nothing  be  admitted  save 
what  can  be  confirmed  by  the  voice  and  witness  of 
God  Himself. 

6—2 


84  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

This  manifesto  was  issued  from  the  Cambridge 
Press  in  the  early  summer  of  1584,  and  on  the  23rd  of 
November  following,  Parliament  again  met  for  the 
despatch  of  business.  The  puritans  were  still  sanguine 
of  obtaining  some  advance  in  the  practical  achieve- 
ment of  their  ideals,  for  in  the  House  of  Commons  as 
well  as  in  the  Privy  Council  there  was  a  strong 
element  in  their  favour.  Their  agents.  Fuller  tells 
us,  were  about  the  doors  of  the  House  all  day,  and 
making  interest  in  the  chambers  of  parliament  men  in 
the  evening.  On  the  14th  of  December,  three  petitions 
were  presented  to  the  House,  for  liberty  to  godly 
preachers,  restoration  to  office  of  those  set  aside,  and 
for  a  speedy  supply  of  able  men  for  destitute  parishes. 
At  this  point  Dr  Turner  rose  and  reminded  the 
members  of  a  Bill  and  a  Book  he  on  a  former 
occasion  had  offered  to  the  House :  the  Bill  providing 
that  no  other  form  of  subscription  be  required  of 
ministers  than  that  enjoined  by  the  Act  of  1571,  and 
that  no  man  presented  by  the  lawful  patron  should 
be  refused  institution  by  the  bishop  except  for 
obstinately  defending  heresies  condemned  by  the 
Word  of  God.  The  Book  offered  along  with  the  Bill 
consisted  of  thirty-four  Articles,  which  by  the  advice 
of  ministers  had  been  reduced  to  sixteen,  and  these 
he  desired  might  be  submitted  to  the  House  of  Lords 
and  they  be  requested  to  join  the  Commons  in  ex- 
hibiting them  in  humble  suit  to  the  Queen.    These 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY     85 

sixteen  Articles,  presented  in  the  form  of  a  petition, 
were  against  insufficient  ministers ;  in  favour  of 
parishes  trying  and  allowing  their  pastors  ;  against 
ministers  being  called  to  account  by  commissioners 
and  officials  instead  of  by  the  bishops  themselves  ;  in 
favour  of  six  ministers  being  associated  with  the 
bishop  in  every  ordination ;  for  the  restoration  of 
deprived  ministers ;  against  excommunications  ex 
officio  mero ;  for  permission  to  hold  religious  exercises 
and  conferences  in  every  archdeaconry  under  direction 
of  the  bishop ;  and  for  the  removal  of  all  non-residences 
and  pluralities  fi'om  the  ChurcL 

With  some  alterations  and  omissions  this  Book  of 
Petitions  was  committed  and  approved,  and  was,  soon 
after,  presented  by  the  Commons  to  the  Lords.  The 
answer  of  the  Lords,  as  reported  to  the  Lower  House 
by  Sir  Francis  KnoUys,  was  to  the  effect  that  many  of 
the  Articles  were  regarded  as  unnecessary  and  others 
of  them  were  already  provided  for ;  and  as  to  the 
uniformity  of  Common  Prayer  which  the  petitioners 
wished  to  be  left  to  the  discretion  of  the  minister, 
that  had  been  established  by  Parliament.  Both  the 
archbishops  spoke  against  the  petition,  and  both 
also  afterwards  gave  their  reasons  at  length  in 
writing. 

This  appeal  being  without  effect,  the  Commons 
introduced  other  bills,  among  them  being  one  against 
plui*alities  and  non-residence,  and  one  in  favour  of 


86  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  right  of  appeal  from  the  Ecclesiastical  Courts 
to  a  higher  tribunal.  These  passed  the  Lower  House 
but  were  opposed  and  lost  in  the  Lords.  Undeterred 
by  this  additional  defeat,  the  Commons  resumed 
debate  on  certain  other  Bills  intended  to  limit  the 
power  of  the  spiritual  courts  and  also  the  jurisdiction 
of  the  prelates.  Archbishop  Whitgift,  alarmed  by 
the  passing  of  two  of  these,  wrote  at  once  to  the 
Queen  informing  her  that,  notwithstanding  her  recent 
charge  to  the  Commons  forbidding  discussion  on 
matters  relating  to  religion,  they  had  passed  one  Bill 
relating  to  the  ministry,  and  another  giving  liberty 
to  marry  at  all  times  of  the  year,  contrary  to  the 
ancient  Canons.  At  once  a  message  came  from  the 
Queen  to  the  Commons  reprimanding  them  for  thus 
encroaching  on  her  supremacy,  and  commanding  the 
Speaker  *  to  see  that  no  Bills  concerning  Reformation 
in  Ecclesiastical  Causes  be  exhibited,  and  should  they 
be  exhibited  that  they  be  not  read.' 

Still,  in  spite  of  this  remonstrance,  the  Commons 
introduced  a  BiU  for  further  reformation,  and  what 
was  more,  connected  with  the  Bill  a  proposed  form 
of  service  entitled  'A  Booke  of  the  Forme  of  Common 
Prayers,  Administration  of  the  Sacraments,  etc., 
agreeable  to  God's  Worde,  and  the  Use  of  the 
Reformed  Churches,'  which  it  was  proposed  to 
substitute  for  the  one  already  in  use.  On  motion 
being  made  for  the  reading  of  this  book  the  speaker 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY     87 

reminded  them  that  the  Queen  had  already  com- 
manded the  House  not  to  meddle  with  such  matters, 
since  she  herself  had  promised  to  take  order  therein, 
he  therefore  advised  them  to  refrain.  This  raised  a 
storm,  and  the  House  being  still  resolved  to  have  the 
book  read,  the  speaker  rose  and  more  decisively 
declared  such  reading  to  be  out  of  order,  the  book  pre- 
scribing a  new  form  of  administration  to  the  discredit 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer.  It  could  only  have 
the  eflfect  of  rousing  her  Majesty's  indignation  against 
them.  Therein  he  rightly  judged,  for  though  the 
book  was  not  read,  but  only  proposed  to  be,  the 
Queen  sent  a  message  demanding  both  the  petition 
and  the  book,  and  ordering  such  of  the  membei-s  as 
had  shewn  zeal  in  the  matter  to  be  sent  prisoners 
to  the  Tower.  Nor  was  this  all.  In  her  speech, 
when  dismissing  Parliament  at  the  end  of  the 
session,  she  returned  to  this  interference  with  her 
prerogative,  as  she  regarded  it  There  was  one  thing, 
she  said,  that  touched  her  so  near  that  she  might  not 
overskip,  namely,  religion.  To  find  fault  with  the 
order  of  the  clergy  was  virtually  to  slander  both 
her  and  the  Church  whose  overlooker  she  was.  If 
schisms  or  errors  heretical  were  suffered  the  negli- 
gence would  be  hers,  and  could  not  be  excused. 
After  charging  the  bishops,  she  turned  to  those  who 
were  bent  on  further  reformation,  saying  that  she 
saw  many  overbold  with  God  Almighty,  making  too 


88  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

many  scannings  of  His  blessed  Will,  as  lawyers  did 
with  human  testaments.  This  presumption  was  so 
great  that  she  might  not  suffer  it.  She  was  minded 
neither  to  animate  Romanists  nor  tolerate  new- 
fangleness,  but  to  guide  both  by  God's  true  rule. 
Such  was  the  Queen's  determination,  and  it  was  the 
memory  of  such  interference  with  the  liberties  of 
Parliament  as  these  that  led  Hume  the  historian, 
who  had  no  great  liking  for  puritans,  to  say :  *  So 
absolute  indeed  was  the  authority  of  the  Crown  that 
the  precious  spark  of  liberty  had  been  Mndled  and 
was  preserved  by  the  puritans  alone ;  and  it  was  to 
this  sect  that  the  English  owe  the  whole  freedom  of 
their  constitution.' 

Finding  that  nothing  was  to  be  looked  for  from 
appeals  to  Parliament,  the  puritan  clergy  within  the 
Church  resolved  to  take  steps  themselves  for  a 
practical  carrying  out  of  the  church  discipline  they 
held  to  be  more  scriptural.  As  early  as  1572,  in  the 
November  after  the  Bartholomew  Massacre  in  Paris 
of  the  previous  August,  they  had  set  up  a  congrega- 
tion after  the  presbyterian  model  at  Wandsworth, 
then  a  mere  village  on  the  banks  of  the  Thames. 
Some  fifteen  ministers  from  London  and  from  the 
neighbourhood  of  Wandsworth  were  the  leaders  of 
this  movement,  there  being  associated  with  them  a 
considerable  number  of  influential  laymen.  At  their 
meeting  on  the  20th  of  November  eleven  elders,  or 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    89 

presbyters,  were  chosen  and  their  orders  described  as 
'the  Orders  of  Wandsworth.'  This  organisation  has 
sometimes  been  described  as  the  first  presbyterian 
church  in  England.  Strictly  speaking,  however,  it 
was  rather  an  association  within  the  borders  of  the 
Established  Church  than  an  organised  separation 
from  it.  The  proceedings  of  this  community  were 
carried  on  with  great  secrecy,  so  much  so  that  though 
the  commissioners  knew  of  its  existence  they  were 
unable  to  find  out  who  belonged  to  it.  Besides  this 
organised  movement  at  Wandsworth,  separate  com- 
munities were  established  for  the  observance  of  the 
Lord's  Supper,  those  joining  in  them  signing  a 
common  declaration  to  the  eflect  that  they  wished  to 
unite  themselves  in  prayer  and  hearing  with  those 
who  renounced  the  idolatries  of  the  Church,  notwith- 
standing the  danger  incurred  by  not  coming  to  their 
own  parish  churches.  Each  of  those  who  signed  also 
personally  assented  to  these  solemn  words  :  *  Having 
joined  myself  to  the  Church  of  Christ  I  have  yielded 
myself  to  the  discipline  of  God's  Word  which,  if  I 
again  forsake,  I  should  be  forsaking  the  Union 
wherein  I  am  knit  to  the  body  of  Christ.' 

In  1576  a  step  forward  was  taken  by  the  establish- 
ment of  the  presbyterian  discipline  in  the  Channel 
Islands.  After  the  massacre  in  Paris  in  1572  many 
French  protestants  fled  to  these  islands  for  safety, 
and  were,  by  the  lords  of  the  council,  allowed  to 


90  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

retain  the  Genevan  or  French  form  of  service  to 
which  they  had  been  accustomed.  Representatives 
from  various  districts  met  at  St  Peter's  Port, 
Guernsey,  when  the  draft  of  a  form  of  church 
discipline  was  duly  discussed  and  adapted  to  the  use 
of  the  islands.  This  was  agreed  upon  the  following 
year  at  a  synod  held  in  Guernsey,  June,  1576,  and 
was  afterwards  confirmed  at  a  later  synod  held  in 
Jersey  in  October,  1577.  Meantime  the  puritans  on 
the  mainland  kept  up  their  Associations  and  private 
assemblies.  The  two  counties  of  Warwick  and 
Northampton  were  especially  forward  in  the  move- 
ment. An  important  meeting  was  held  at  Cockfield 
in  Sufiblk,  when  sixty  ministers  from  Norfolk,  Suffolk 
and  Cambridgeshire  came  together  in  conference,  to 
determine  what  in  the  use  of  the  Prayer  Book  might 
be  tolerated  and  what  refused.  This  meeting  stood 
adjourned  to  Cambridge  at  the  next  Commencement, 
and  afterwards  from  thence  to  London.  The  result 
of  these  three  synodical  gatherings  was  embodied  in 
certain  conclusions,  formally  drawn  up  by  Cartwright 
and  Travers,  the  object  of  which  was  the  introduction 
of  important  changes  in  the  organisation  and  worship 
of  the  National  Church  which  should  yet  not  mean 
separation  from  that  Church.  Churches  were  to  be 
arranged  in  classical,  provincial  and  national  synods  ; 
ministers  should  be  called  to  the  pastorate,  first  of 
all,  by  the  churches  they  were  to  serve,  and  this 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY  91 

call  be  approved  by  the  local  classic  meeting  in 
conference ;  and  then  the  minister,  so  called  and 
so  approved,  should  by  letters  be  commended  to  the 
bishop  for  ordination.  Churchwardens  and  collectors 
for  the  poor  could  be  turned  into  elders  and  deacons 
without  disturbing  the  present  arrangement.  In  the 
matter  of  subscription  to  the  Articles  and  Book  of 
Common  Prayer,  if  this  should  be  again  urged,  it 
was  decided  that  it  might  be  consented  to  only 
in  accordance  with  the  statute  of  1571  which 
limited  subscription  to  such  Articles  only  as  con- 
tain the  sum  of  the  Christian  faith  and  the 
doctrine  of  the  Sacraments.  Subscription  to  the 
Prayer  Book  and  to  the  rest  of  the  Articles  should 
be  resisted  even  though  a  man  should  be  deprived  of 
his  ministry  for  refusing.  Beyond  these  arrangements 
a  more  extended  form  of  organisation  was  also 
resolved  upon.  The  shire  of  Northampton,  for 
example,  was  arranged  in  three  separate  classes, 
held  in  the  towns  of  Northampton,  Daventry  and 
Kettering.  A  provincial  synod  of  these  classes  was 
also  convened  in  the  town  of  Northampton,  and 
similar  gatherings  held  in  other  counties,  especially 
Warwickshire,  Suffolk,  Norfolk  and  Essex.  It  was 
further  ordered  that  the  results  arrived  at  in  these 
conferences  should  be  reported  to  the  greater 
assemblies  held  in  Cambridge  at  the  time  of  the 
Sturbridge  Fair  of  1587,  and  in  London  at  the  time 


92  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

of  the  Bartholomew  Fair  ;  such  times  were  chosen  as 
being  occasions  when  considerable  gatherings  of 
people  would  be  less  noticeable.  Reports  were  also 
to  be  sent  up  to  a  synod  held  at  St  John's  College, 
Cambridge,  at  the  Sturbridge  Fair  time  of  1589.  On 
this  occasion  Travers's  Discipline,  after  further 
revision  and  correction  was  subscribed  to  by  the 
members  present  as  essential  and  necessary  for  all 
time. 

At  the  Northamptonshire  Assembly  an  Ecclesias- 
tical Survey  of  the  churches  of  the  county  was 
ordered  to  be  made  and  a  return  sent  in  of  the  value 
of  each  benefice  and  of  the  population  of  the  parish, 
giving  also  the  name  of  the  incumbent  and  a  descrip- 
tion of  his  personal  character  and  ministry.  It  was 
also  resolved  to  obtain,  if  possible,  a  more  extended, 
a  national,  survey  of  churches  for  parliamentary 
purposes,  and  to  arrange  for  representatives  to  be 
sent  up  to  London  when  Parliament  was  in  session. 
It  will  thus  be  seen  that  there  was  a  very  business- 
like air  about  this  design  for  '  setting  up  a  discipline 
within  a  discipline.  Presbytery  in  Episcopacy.' 

There  was  another  department  of  their  propa- 
ganda destined  to  play  an  important  part  in  the 
movement.  The  men  driven  from  their  ministry  and 
silenced  from  public  speech  began  to  defend  them- 
selves by  means  of  the  press.  The  age  of  that 
pamphleteering,  which  in  the  next  century  was  to 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY  93 

assume  such  portentous  dimensions,  had  begun  to 
dawn.  Tracts  and  treatises  appeared  in  quick 
succession  in  which  the  state  of  things  existing  in 
the  Church  was  laid  bare  with  no  gentle  hand,  and 
strange  tales  became  current  talk.  The  archbishop 
decided  all  this  must  come  to  an  end.  On  June  23, 
1586,  therefore,  he  obtained  from  the  Star  Chamber 
a  decree  for  limiting  the  number  of  printing  presses 
and  for  keeping  under  strict  surveillance  such  as  were 
licensed.  It  was  ordered  that  no  press  should  be  set 
up  outside  the  city  and  suburbs  of  London,  except 
one  in  the  University  of  Cambridge  and  one  in  the 
University  of  Oxford,  one  and  no  more.  Even  in 
London  no  printer  might  start  business  except  with 
the  consent  of  the  wardens  of  the  Company  of 
Stationers,  and  presses  everywhere  were  to  be  open 
and  accessible  at  all  times  to  the  said  wardens. 
Finally  no  book  was  to  be  printed  till  first  read  by 
the  archbishop,  the  bishop  of  London,  or  by  censors 
of  their  appointment. 

Under  the  powers  conferred  by  this  decree,  the 
printing-office  of  Robert  Waldegrave  in  St  Paul's 
Churchyard  was  broken  open  on  April  16,  1588,  by 
John  Wolfe,  the  beadle  of  the  Stationers'  Company. 
The  press  was  seized,  the  letters  defaced  and  various 
printed  sheets  carried  away.  Among  the  latter 
were  some  copies  of  a  work  entitled  The  State  of 
the  Church  of  Englcmd  laid  open  in  a  Conference. 


94  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

No  name  of  the  author  appeared  upon  the  title-page, 
but  it  is  now  known  to  have  been  the  work  of  John 
UdaU,  the  vicar  of  Bjngston-on-Thames,  a  convinced 
puritan,  and  a  man  of  some  reputation  as  an  author 
and  an  eloquent  preacher.  This  book  of  his,  better 
known  under  the  title  of  Diotrephes,  though  not 
belonging  to  the  series,  may  yet  be  described  as  the 
precursor  of  the  Martin  Marprelate  Tracts,  so  famous 
in  the  discussions  of  the  time.  This  description  of 
the  state  of  the  Church  was  brought  out  in  the  form 
of  a  dialogue  which  is  supposed  to  have  taken  place 
at  an  Inn  on  the  North  Road  where  wayfarers 
from  Scotland  and  the  North  met  travellers  from 
London  and  the  South.  In  this  conversation  there 
are  not  a  few  Bunyanesque  touches  of  humour,  with 
suggestive  asides,  reminding  us  again  and  again  of 
Mr  Byends  and  his  way  of  looking  at  life.  Diotrephes 
is  a  bishop  travelling  incognito  from  Scotland  where, 
to  his  distress,  the  puritans  have  set  up  their  discipline 
and  utterly  overthrown  the  sovereignty  of  the  bishops. 
He  would  know  from  the  inn-keeper  what  news  there 
is  of  church  affairs  hereabouts.  This  is  not  a  subject 
on  which  mine  host  is  very  strong,  for  he  seldom  goes 
to  church,  but  he  will  fetch  in  a  money-lender  from 
London  who  happens  to  be  in  the  house.  On  this 
worthy  being  appealed  to,  he  relates  that  the  bishops 
— '  God's  blessing  be  on  them  for  it — say  pretty  weU 
by  one  and  by  one   to    these   precise   and   whot 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY  96 

preachers ;  for  some  of  them  are  put  to  silence  and 
others  are  close  prisoners  in  the  Gatehouse ;  some 
are  well-loaden  with  irons  in  the  White  Lion,  and 
some  are  in  the  Clinke.'  This  is  good  news  to  the 
inn-keeper  who  likes  not  these  precisian  preachers. 
For  one  of  that  sort  has  come  to  this  town,  *  a  town 
that  stands  on  victualling,  being  thorow-fare,  and  he 
preacheth  against  good-fellowship  which  he  caUs 
drunkenness,'  so  that  he  has  spoilt  half  their  gains. 
At  this  point  one  Paule,  a  preacher  from  London 
joins  in  the  talk,  giving  a  searching  account  of  church 
matters  from  the  puritan  point  of  view,  and,  as  we 
may  suppose,  there  is  animated  discussion  till  bed- 
time. Next  morning,  before  the  travellers  set  forth 
on  their  divers  ways,  the  talk  is  renewed,  the  con- 
cluding part,  which  is  the  longest,  being  a  conference 
between  Tertullus  a  Catholic  and  Diotrephes  as  to 
how  they  can  best  combine  to  checkmate  the  puritans 
and  safeguard  the  bishops.  They  agree  that  it  would 
be  well  to  secure  the  lords  of  the  council,  and  make 
sure  of  the  universities,  for  they  have  great  privileges 
and  puritans  start  up  every  day. 

Even  from  this  brief  glimpse  it  will  be  seen  that 
Diotrephes  was  fitting  forerunner  to  'Martin  Mar- 
prelate,  Gentleman,'  and  indeed  was  the  work  of  the 
same  printer  who,  six  months  later,  sent  forth  The 
Epistle,  the  first  of  the  Marprelate  series.  For 
Waldegrave,  after  having  had  press  and  types  seized 


96  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

in  London  made  his  way  to  Kingston,  Udall's  town, 
and  thence,  to  avoid  observation,  to  East  Molesey 
near  by,  and  set  up  another  press  at  which  soon  after 
midsummer  1588,  he  printed  another  book  for  Udall 
entitled  A  Demonstratio^i  of  Discipline  ;  this  being 
followed  in  November  by  The  Epistle.  The  ap- 
pearance of  the  latter,  being  as  we  have  said,  the  first 
of  the  Marprelate  series  produced  a  great  sensation 
and  became  the  talk  of  the  town.  '  Every  man,'  says 
Martin,  '  talks  of  my  Worship ;  he  says  that  he  has 
been  entertained  at  Court'  This  fame,  naturally,  was 
not  without  its  peril ;  the  authorities  were  soon  eagerly 
in  pursuit,  and  as  East  Molesey  was  no  longer  con- 
sidered safe  the  press  and  types  were  secretly  carted 
away  to  Fawsley,  the  seat  of  Sir  Richard  Knightley, 
near  Northampton,  and  there  The  Epitome,  the 
second  Martin,  which  had  been  promised  in  The 
Epistle,  was  printed. 

Early  in  1589  Thomas  Cooper,  the  bishop  of 
Winchester,  in  reply  to  these  attacks  published  an 
Admonition  to  the  People  of  England,  denying  the 
charges  made  against  the  bishops  and  urging  as  a 
warning  that  this  attack  upon  the  Church  would 
certainly  be  followed  by  an  attack  upon  the  State. 
Meantime  to  evade  pursuit,  the  secret  press  was 
removed  from  Fawsley  to  Coventry  where  the  broad- 
side known  as  The  Minerals,  one  of  the  minor 
Marprelate  tracts,  was  printed  in  February.    Towards 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY  97 

the  end  of  March  another  of  the  tracts  was  printed 
at  Coventry  having  for  its  title,  what  was  then  a 
common  street-cry,  Hay  any  Worke  for  the  Cooper, 
which  of  course  was  a  rejoinder  to  Bishop  Cooper's 
Admonition.  After  this  issue  Waldegrave  was 
succeeded  as  printer  by  John  Hodgkins.  The  press 
was  again  removed  from  place  to  place  and  at  length, 
through  the  vigilance  of  the  Earl  of  Derby,  was 
seized  at  Newton,  a  mile  or  so  out  of  Manchester, 
then  one  of  the  strongholds  of  puritanism.  Both  press 
and  printers  were  at  once  sent  back  to  London  under 
escort,  the  printers  being  received  as  close  prisoners 
to  Bridewell. 

It  does  not  fall  within  the  purpose  of  this  narra- 
tive to  foUow  any  further  the  history  of  these  once- 
famous  tracts.  It  may  suffice  to  say  that  altogether 
there  were  seven  of  them,  and  that  while  their 
authorship,  like  that  of  the  Letters  of  Junius,  is  one 
of  the  unsolved  problems  of  literature,  there  is  a 
growing  consensus  of  opinion  that  they  were  mainly, 
if  not  entirely,  from  the  pen  of  Job  Throckmorton, 
the  puritan  squire  of  Haseley  Manor,  near  Warwick  ; 
and  that  along  with  Waldegrave  and  Hodgkins, 
John  Penry  was  concerned  with  him  in  the  arrange- 
ments for  printing. 

The  purpose  of  the  writer  was  to  carry  the  war 
into  the  camp  of  the  men  who,  as  he  believed,  were 
not  only  oppressing  the  puritan  clergy,  but  were 

B.  7 


08  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

themselves  open  to  serious  charges  of  neglect  and 
worldliness.  This  he  did,  exposing  them  to  ridicule 
by  means  of  banter  and  satire.  Yet  it  must  be  said 
that  in  the  midst  of  all  his  banter,  and  under  all  his 
personalities  Martin  had  a  serious  and  earnest  pur- 
pose, which  can  scarcely  be  said  of  the  anti- 
Martinists,  who,  in  their  replies  to  his  attacks, 
descended  only  too  often  to  grossness  and  in- 
decencies. But  what  we  are  now  mainly  concerned 
with  is  the  fact  that  the  Marprelate  Tracts,  with 
their  compromising  charges  and  irritating  person- 
alities, gave  added  force  to  the  resentment  roused  by 
the  persistent  and  organised  attempts  of  the  puritan 
party  to  overthrow  Episcopacy  and  to  substitute  for 
it  the  system  of  Scotland  and  Geneva  in  the  govern- 
ment of  the  English  Church. 

We  may  now  turn  for  a  moment  to  see  how  these 
attempts,  at  length,  reached  a  crisis  and  ended  in 
conspicuous  failure.  It  goes  without  saying  that  the 
authorities  of  the  Church  were  not  altogether 
ignorant  of  what  was  going  on.  For  letters  had  been 
intercepted  and  plans  laid  bare ;  and  at  length  on 
July  16,  1590,  Archbishop  Whitgift  drew  up  a  series 
of  Articles  against  the  leaders  of  the  movement 
under  which,  later  in  the  year,  they  were  summoned 
before  the  Court  of  High  Commission,  and  afterwards 
called  to  appear  before  the  Star  Chamber.  Cartwright 
was  summoned   from   hi?  hospital  at  Warwick  to 


PRESBYTERY  IN  EPISCOPACY    99 

London  and  lodged  in  the  Fleet  prison.  He  and  his 
companions  were  examined  again  and  again  and 
refusing  to  take  the  oath  ex  officio  were  consigned  to 
prison.  There  they  lingered  on  all  through  the  cold 
and  wretchedness  of  that  and  the  following  winter 
without  any  farther  process.  After  two  years  and 
more  of  this  kind  of  experience  they  petitioned  the 
Queen  for  a  merciful  release,  repudiating  the  charges 
of  sedition,  schism  and  rebellion,  which  had  been 
brought  against  them,  and  assuring  her  of  their 
loyalty.  But  she  was  deaf  to  their  pleading.  Even- 
tually Cartwright  was  released  upon  promise  of  quiet 
and  peaceable  behaviour,  but  only  upon  bond  to 
appear  before  the  High  Commission  when  called 
upon.  Several  of  the  prisoners  yielded  at  length, 
took  the  oath  and  gave  evidence  as  to  what  had 
taken  place  in  their  assemblies.  Others  still  refused 
and  remained  under  suspension,  some  for  five  and 
others  for  seven  years.  John  Udall,  whose  Dio- 
trephes  and  Demonstration  of  Discipline  could 
neither  be  forgotten  nor  forgiven,  was  singled  out  for 
special  indignity.  As  his  vicarage  was  in  the  county 
of  Surrey  he  was  taken,  heavily  ironed,  and  indicted 
at  the  Croydon  Assizes  of  July,  1590,  for  sedition, 
inasmuch  as  he  *  not  having  the  fear  of  God  before 
his  eyes  did  maliciously  publish  a  slanderous  and 
infamous  libel  against  the  Queen's  Majesty,  her 
Crown  and  Dignity.'    So  ran  the  indictment  in  which 

7—2 


100  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

was  also  quoted  an  objectionable  passage  from  the 
Demonstration,  and  reference  made  to  the  burning 
of  his  other  book  the  Diotrephes  dialogue.  After 
the  forms  of  law  had  been  gone  through  the  prisoner 
at  the  bar  was  convicted  of  felony,  and  condemned 
to  be  executed :  any  criticism  of  arrangements  the 
Queen  had  set  up  in  the  Church  being  ruled  to  be 
sedition  against  her  person.  No  immediate  attempt, 
however,  was  made  to  carry  out  this,  which  has  been 
described  as  an  atrocious  sentence,  and  Udall  lingered 
on  indefinitely  in  prison.  We  gather  from  records  of 
the  time  that  great  resentment  was  felt  at  these 
proceedings,  and  that  persons  of  influence,  such  as 
Sir  Walter  Raleigh,  the  Earl  of  Essex,  and  No  well,  the 
dean  of  St  Paul's,  interested  themselves  in  the  case 
of  this  man  and  interceded  on  his  behalf,  but  without 
result.  Further  still,  in  March,  1592,  the  Governor  of 
the  Turkey  Company  offered  to  send  him  to  Syria,  as 
pastor  to  their  agents  in  that  country,  if  he  could  be 
released  at  once.  But  he  was  not,  and  the  vessel  was 
under  the  necessity  of  sailing  without  hina.  Three 
months  later  a  pardon  was  sealed  in  June,  but  even 
after  this  there  were  other  requisite  formalities,  and 
before  these  could  be  gone  through,  the  hardships 
of  prison  life  had  done  their  work,  and  John  Udall 
died  while  still  a  prisoner  in  Southwark  gaoL 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY 

The  sternly  repressive  measures  carried  out  by 
Archbishop  Whitgift  against  those  who  sought  to 
graft  the  presbyterian  discipline  upon  the  episcopal 
system  were  successful  in  crushing  out  all  further 
attempts  at  organisation  on  presbyterian  lines ;  but 
not  the  earnest  desire  after  further  reformation  in  a 
puritan  direction.  Disaffection  was  not  put  an  end 
to  by  being  driven  out  of  sight.  Those  who  were 
locked  up  in  the  prisons  of  London  represented  only 
a  fraction  of  those  who  were  longing  for  change  and 
more  earnest  spiritual  life.  The  movement  had  spread 
widely  in  the  English  shires,  and  out  of  the  two 
thousand  ministers  in  the  Church  who  were  really 
preachers  no  fewer  than  five  hundred  subscribed  the 
Book  of  Discipline  in  1590,  and  prayed  Parliament 
that  this  book  '  might  be  from  henceforth  authorised, 
put  in  use  and  practised  throughout  all  Her  Majesty's 
dominions.'  This  was  an  ominous  fact,  and  when 
Hooker  in  1594  published  the  first  four  books  of  hie 
Ecclesiastical  Polity,  he  evidently  felt  that  even  then 


102  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  threatening  danger  had  not  ceased  to  impend. 
In  a  long  preface  he  explains  why  he  entered  upon 
this,  the  great  work  of  his  life — '  though  for  no  other 
cause  yet  for  this  :  that  posterity  may  know  we  have 
not  loosely  through  silence  permitted  things  to  pass 
away  as  in  a  dream.' 

Having  traced  the  course  of  the  puritan  move- 
ment within  the  National  Church  from  1564  to  1590, 
we  turn  now  to  that  other  outworking  of  yet  more 
strenuous  puritan  feeling  which  took  shape  outside 
the  State  Church  system,  taking  the  form  of 
Separatism  and  the  establishment  of  self-governing 
churches.  This  movement  took  its  rise  mainly  in 
two  different  centres — London  and  the  Eastern 
Counties,  the  former  being  specially  associated  with 
the  names  of  Henry  Barrow  and  John  Greenwood,  the 
latter  with  that  of  Robert  Browne.  The  last-named 
reformer,  from  whom  came  the  name  '  Brownist,'  was 
born  about  1550,  the  third  son  of  Anthony  Browne  of 
Tolethorpe  Manor,  sheriff  of  Rutlandshire  in  1546, 
1558  and  1571.  He  graduated  at  Cambridge  in  1572, 
and  even  as  an  undergraduate  was  spoken  of  as  *  being 
known  and  counted  forward  in  religion.'  Moreover 
he  was  at  the  University  at  the  time  of  the  puritan 
excitement  caused  by  the  vestment  controversy  and 
Cartwright's  lectures.  And  after  leaving  Cambridge, 
*he  fell  into  great  care  and  was  sore  grieved  while 
he  long  considered  many  things  amiss,  and  the  cause 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  103 

of  all  to  be  the  woeful  and  lamentable  state  of  the 
Church.'  In  1580,  he  had  reached  the  theoretical 
position  of  Congregationalism,  which  is  that  you 
cannot  accept  the  entire  baptized  population  of  a 
given  parish  as  the  Church  of  Christ  in  that  place, 
for,  as  he  expressed  it,  '  the  Kingdom  of  God  is  not 
to  be  begun  by  whole  parishes  but  rather  of  the 
worthiest  were  they  never  so  few.'  The  spiritual  few 
he  would  take  as  a  nucleus  and  work  from  them  as 
the  centre.  On  this  principle  as  the  theoretical 
justification  of  separation,  and  not  merely  on  dislike 
of  ceremonies  and  prelatical  power,  he  and  his  friend 
Richard  Harrison,  also  a  Cambridge  man,  organised 
a  free  church  in  Norwich  in  1581.  They  also  visited 
other  places  in  East  Anglia,  notably  Bury  St  Edmunds, 
where  there  were  '  assemblies  of  the  common  people 
to  the  number  of  a  hundred  at  a  time,  who  met  in 
private  houses  and  conventicles.'  As  a  result  Browne 
found  himself  in  prison  and  on  his  release  went  to 
Middelburg  in  Zealand,  where  in  1582  he  printed  and 
published  the  three  books  in  which  he  gave  formal 
expression  to  the  principles  he  had  embraced.  These 
were :  A  Treatise  of  Reformation  vnthout  tarying 
for  anie  ;  The  life  and  manner  of  all  true  Christians; 
and  A  Treatise  upon  the  23.  of  Matthewe.'  His 
friend  Richard  Harrison  also  published  at  the  same 
time  a  small  book  on  the  122nd  Psalm  bearing  in  the 
same  direction.    These  books  were  conveyed  over 


104  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

into  England  secretly,  and  in  June,  1583,  a  royal 
proclamation  was  issued  against  them,  commanding 
the  destruction  of  all  copies  of  'the  same  or  such 
like  seditious  books.'  About  the  time  this  pro- 
clamation appeared,  the  Assizes  were  held  at  Bury 
St  Edmunds,  when  John  Copping  and  Elias  Thacker 
were  convicted  of  sedition  for  spreading  these  books, 
and  were  hanged  before  the  Assizes  were  over. 
About  the  same  time  also,  and  upon  the  same  charge, 
William  Denys  was  hanged  at  Thetford,  criticism 
of  the  Queen's  Church  being  ruled  to  be  sedition 
against  the  Queen's  person. 

Earlier  even  than  this  Eastern  movement  in  the 
direction  of  Separatism,  was  another  which  was 
organised  in  London  some  time  before  1671.  Three 
documents  which  happen  to  have  been  preserved 
together  among  the  State  Papers  bring  to  our  notice 
what  would  seem  to  have  been  the  earliest  organised 
Congregational  church  after  the  Reformation.  The 
most  important  of  the  three  is  a  petition  to  the 
Queen  signed  by  twenty-seven  persons,  one  of  them 
giving  Whitechapel  Street  as  an  address,  urging  the 
necessity  of  ecclesiastical  reform.  They  describe  them- 
selves as  '  We  a  poor  congregation  whom  God  hath 
separated  from  the  Church  of  England  and  from  the 
mingled  and  false  worshipping  therein '  and  say  that 
*  as  God  giveth  strength  at  this  day  we  do  serve  the 
Lord  every  Sabbath  day  in  houses,  and  on  the  fourth 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  105 

day  come  together  weekly  to  use  prayer  and  exercise 
discipline  on  them  that  do  deserve  it,  by  the  strength 
and  true  warrant  of  the  Lord  God's  Word.'  They 
further  state  incidentally  that  the  maintainers  of  the 
Canon  Law  have  *by  long  imprisonment  pined  and 
killed  the  Lord's  servants,  as  our  minister  Richard 
Fitz,  Thomas  Rowland,  deacon,  one  Partryche  and 
Gyles  Fouler,  and  besides  them  a  great  multitude.' 
Along  with  this  written  and  subscribed  petition  there 
is  a  small  printed  sheet  in  black  letter  entitled  Tlie 
trewe  Markes  of  Christ's  Church  &c.  These  are 
three  (1)  the  glorious  Word  and  evangel  are  preached 
freely  and  purely ;  (2)  the  sacraments  are  administered 
according  to  the  institution  and  good  word  of  the 
Lord  Jesus  ;  and  (3)  discipline  is  administered  agi-ee- 
ably  to  the  same  heavenly  and  almighty  word.  The 
third  document,  also  in  black  letter,  sets  forth  reasons 
for  separation  from  the  Anglican  Church  and  prays 
that  '  God  may  give  them  strength  still  to  strive  in 
suffering  under  the  Cross,  that  the  blessed  Word  of 
our  God  alone  may  rule  and  have  the  highest  placa' 
What  became  of  this  little  community  we  do  not 
know.  It  was  probably  broken  up  and  scattered,  the 
members  of  it  being  sent  to  prison,  and  these  somewhat 
pathetic  and  time-worn  documents  preserved  in  the 
Record  Office  are  all  that  remains  to  tell  the  tale. 
But  moving  westward  from  AVhitechapel  in  1571,  we 
come  in  later  years  upon  congregations  of  Separatists 


106  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

meeting  in  various  places  in  the  city,  and  in  the 
woods  of  Islington  where  the  protestants  were  ac- 
customed to  meet  for  secret  worship  in  Queen  Mary's 
time.  On  Sunday,  October  8,  1586,  twenty-one  of 
these  people  were  met  at  Henry  Martin's  house  in 
the  parish  of  St  Andrew's-in-the- Wardrobe,  and,  as 
they  were  listening  to  the  reading  of  the  Scriptures 
by  John  Greenwood,  they  were  broken  in  upon  by 
the  bishop  of  London's  pursuivants  and  brought  as 
prisoners  the  same  day  to  his  palace  at  Fulham  for 
examination.  In  the  event  ten  were  released  and 
eleven  kept  close  prisoners ;  of  the  eleven  thus 
detained  Alice  Roe  and  Margaret  Maynard  died  of 
the  *  infection '  of  Newgate,  and  John  Chandler,  and 
Nicholas  Crane,  an  aged  man  of  sixty-six  years,  also 
died  in  prison. 

John  Greenwood,  who  was  reading  the  Scriptures 
to  these  people  at  the  time  they  were  broken  in 
upon,  was,  like  Robert  Browne,  an  undergraduate  at 
Cambridge  at  the  time  of  the  Cartwright  controversy. 
His  mind  was  so  powei-fully  influenced  by  this  that 
even  after  he  had  left  the  University  and  had  received 
ordination  he  first  resigned  his  cure,  then  a  private 
chaplaincy  held  in  the  house  of  Lord  Rich  of 
Rochford,  and  finally  left  the  Episcopal  Church 
altogether.  About  the  same  time  he  formed  an 
intimate  friendship  with  Henry  Barrow,  the  son  of 
a  country  squire  of  Shipdam  in  Norfolk,  he  being 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  107 

a  kinsman  also  of  Lord  Bacon.  At  the  close  of  his 
Cambridge  career,  Barrow  was  trained  for  the  bar  at 
Gray's  Inn,  living  in  London  for  a  while.  Turning 
casually  into  a  church  one  day  he  heard  a  sermon 
which  resulted  in  a  changed  life  for  him.  It  became 
whispered  among  his  acquaintances  that  Barrow  had 
turned  puritan,  or  as  Bacon  described  it :  *  He  made 
a  leap  from  a  vain  and  libertine  youth  to  a  precise- 
ness  in  the  highest  degree.'  Changed  life  brought 
changed  companionships  and  he  and  John  Greenwood 
became  from  this  time  friends  of  the  most  intimate 
kind.  When  therefore  Greenwood  had  been  arrested 
in  London  and  sent  prisoner  to  the  Clink,  Barrow  went 
to  visit  him  on  Sunday  morning,  November  19,  1586. 
Little  knowing  that  he  was  already  suspect  because 
of  his  ecclesiastical  opinions,  he  found  that  he  had 
walked  into  a  trap,  for  they  had  been  on  the  look-out 
for  him.  He  was  arrested  at  once  and  sent  in  a  boat 
up  the  river  to  Lambeth,  where  he  was  examined  by 
Whitgift  and  committed  to  the  Gatehouse.  Five 
months  later  he  was  again  examined  before  the  Court 
of  High  Commission  ;  and  at  the  Newgate  Sessions 
of  May,  1587,  he  and  his  friend  Greenwood  were 
indicted  under  the  Act  of  1581,  for  'withdrawing 
from  the  religion  now  by  her  Highness's  authority 
established,'  and  committed  to  the  Fleet  prison. 

During  the  long  and  weary  years  of  imprisonment 
which  followed  between  his  committal  to  the  Fleet  in 


108  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

May,  1587,  and  his  execution  at  Tyburn  in  March, 
1593,  Barrow  produced  the  books  with  which  his 
name  is  associated,  the  sheets  of  which  were  conveyed 
out  of  prison  secretly  as  he  wrote  them,  and  printed 
abroad  at  Dort  by  one  Hanse.  The  central  principle 
he  insists  upon  in  these  books  is  that  which  Browne 
had  enunciated  before  him,  namely,  that  you  cannot 
have  a  truly  Christian  Church  unless  it  is  composed 
of  spiritual  men :  *  a  true  planted  and  rightly 
established  Church  of  Christ  is  a  company  of  faithful 
people,  separated  from  unbelievers,  gathered  in  the 
name  of  Christ  whom  they  truly  worship  and  readily 
obey.  They  are  a  brotherhood,  a  communion  of 
saints,  each  one  of  them  standing  in  and  for  their 
Christian  liberty  to  practise  whatsoever  God  hath 
commanded  and  revealed  unto  them  in  His  holy 
Word.'  That  Word  and  not  Tradition  is  to  be  their 
guide ;  that  is  the  golden  reed  for  measuring  our 
temple,  our  altar  and  our  worship.  He  is  opposed  to 
all  hierarchies  in  the  Church,  to  all  lords  and  rulers 
except  Christ  Himself.  According  to  him  the  greatest 
Elder  of  the  Church,  the  pastor,  is  but  a  servant  and 
steward  of  the  house,  not  lord  of  the  heritage ;  his 
honour  consisteth  in  his  service,  and  his  service  be- 
longeth  unto  all.  A  Church  constituted  of  spiritually 
renewed  men  and  recognising  the  headship  and 
authority  of  Christ  is  capable  of  self-government,  has 
right  and  power  to  discipline  itself,  having,  as  every 


ABSOLUTISM  AM)  LIBERTY  109 

particular  congregation  the  power  of  our  Lord  Jesus 
Christ  to  censure  sin  and  excommunicate  obstinate 
offenders. 

Such  were  Barrow's  views  on  Church  government, 
which  were  essentially  and  fundamentally  opposed  to 
the  Established  Church  system  which  lodged  that 
government  in  the  hands  of  Queen  and  Privy  Council, 
archbishops,  bishops  and  archdeacons,  and  in  a  Star 
Chamber  and  Court  of  High  Commission.  The  books 
in  which  he  had  promulgated  these  views,  and  which 
he  had  composed  stealthily  during  his  long  imprison- 
ment, were  now  regarded  as  a  further,  an  additional 
offence  against  the  Queen's  supremacy  in  things 
ecclesiastical  as  well  as  civil.  For  this  further 
offence  he  was  brought  to  trial  on  the  11th  of  March, 
1593,  and  on  the  23rd  both  he  and  John  Greenwood 
were  convicted  of  publishing  seditious  books  and 
sentenced  to  death  for  the  offence. 

Writing  to  a  lady  of  rank,  a  kinswoman  of  his 
own,  between  condemnation  and  execution,  Barrow 
says  :  *  For  books  written  more  than  three  years  since 
(after  well  near  six  years'  imprisonment)  the  prelates 
have  caused  us  to  be  indicted,  arraigned,  condemned.' 
On  March  24,  the  morning  after  sentence  had  been 
passed  preparations  were  made  for  execution  ;  Barrow 
and  Greenwood  were  brought  out  of  prison,  their  irons 
smitten  off  and  they  were  on  the  point  of  being  bound 
to  the  cart  when  a  reprieve  came.    A  few  days  later, 


110  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

however,  they  were  early  and  secretly  conveyed  along 
Holborn  to  the  place  of  execution  at  Tyburn ;  they 
were  actually  tied  by  the  neck  to  the  fatal  tree  and 
were  speaking  a  few  parting  words  to  the  people 
when  again  a  reprieve  came ;  *  the  people  with  ex- 
ceeding rejoicing  and  applause'  cheering  them  on 
their  way  back  to  prison.  Finally,  on  the  6th  of  April, 
they  were  again  conveyed  to  the  place  of  execution 
and  this  time  they  returned  no  more.  The  following 
month,  on  the  29th  of  May,  John  Penry,  who  had 
recently  gone  over  from  presby terianism  to  separatism, 
was  led  out  to  St  Thomas-a- Watering,  Kennington, 
and  there  hanged  also,  at  a  time  when  few  were  near. 
Thus  the  three  Martyrs  of  1583  in  the  Eastern 
Counties  were  followed  by  the  three  of  1593  in 
London  and  the  roll  was  complete.  Meantime,  while 
these  trials  and  executions  were  going  forward,  the 
Parliament  of  35  Elizabeth  was  in  session  from 
February  19  to  April  10,  when  a  measure  was  passed, 
the  stern  Conventicle  Act  of  1593,  which  was  in- 
tended to  crush  Nonconformity  once  for  all,  so  far  as 
Separatism  was  concerned.  This  Act,  which  was  the 
culmination  of  the  measures  taken  by  Elizabeth  to 
repress  Puritanism,  provided  that  if  any  person  above 
the  age  of  sixteen  years  should  refrain,  or  persuade 
any  other  person  to  refrain,  from  coming  to  Church 
for  one  month  without  lawful  cause,  or  be  present  at 
any  assemblies,  conventicles  or  meetings  under  colour 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  111 

or  pretence  of  any  exercise  of  religion,  such  person 
shall  be  committed  to  prison  there  to  remain  without 
bail  or  mainprise  until  they  shall  conform  and  yield 
themselves  to  come  to  some  Church  according  to  her 
Majesty's  laws  and  statutes  aforesaid.  It  was  further 
provided  that  if  such  persons  did  not  conform  and 
make  public  confession  and  submission  in  the  parish 
church  they  shall  abjure  this  realm  of  England  and 
all  others  the  Queen's  Majesty's  dominions  for  ever  ; 
and  if  they  returned  without  special  license,  in  every 
such  case,  the  person  so  offending  should  be  adjudged 
a  felon,  and  should  suffer  as  in  case  of  felony,  without 
benefit  of  clergy.  Under  the  provisions  of  this  Act  it 
will  be  seen  that  those  of  the  puritans  who  were 
Separatists  had  no  choice  but  either  to  conform  or  go 
into  exile.  Penry  before  his  execution  had  advised 
his  London  brethren  to  choose  the  latter :  *  Seeing 
banishment,  with  loss  of  goods  is  likely  to  betide 
you  all,  prepare  yourselves  for  this  hard  entreaty.' 
He  advises  them  to  go  and  to  keep  together,  not 
leaving  the  poor  and  friendless  to  stay  behind  and  be 
forced  to  break  a  good  conscience  for  want  of  support 
and  kindness  ;  and  especially  in  pathetic  entreaty  he 
beseeches  them  to  take  his  poor  and  desolate  widow 
and  his  fatherless  and  friendless  orphans  with  them 
into  exile  whithersoever  they  went.  This  they  did 
when  many  of  them  in  the  summer  and  autumn  of 
that   year  went   over   into    Holland.     For  in  the 


112  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

Netherlands  Republic  there  was,  what  there  was  not 
in  England,  liberty  of  conscience  and  freedom  of 
worship.  On  the  5th  of  July,  1581,  the  knights, 
nobles  and  cities  of  Holland  and  Zealand  had  called 
upon  William  the  Silent  to  accept  entire  authority  as 
sovereign  and  chief  of  the  land,  directing  him  'to 
maintain  the  exercise  only  of  the  Reformed  Evan- 
gelical religion,  without,  however,  permitting  that 
enquiries  should  be  made  into  any  man's  belief  or 
conscience,  or  that  any  injury  or  hindrance  should 
be  offered  to  any  man  on  account  of  his  religion.' 
Thus  Amsterdam  became  the  asylum  of  liberty,  and 
drew  to  itself  from  many  lands  those  who  valued 
freedom,  civil  or  religious.  Among  these  were  the 
members  of  the  Separatist  Church  in  London,  also 
those  who  went  over  from  Gainsborough  and  Scrooby, 
the  last-named  community,  after  remaining  some 
months  at  Amsterdam,  ultimately  settling  at  Leyden 
where  they  remained  till  1620,  when  they  sailed  in 
the  Mayflower  for  New  England.  These  Churches 
seeking  refuge  in  Holland  between  1595  and  1620, 
were  recruited  by  other  exiles  for  conscience  sake 
from  various  parts  of  England.  As  we  gather  from 
the  Puiboeken,  or  public  records  of  their  adopted 
country,  these  came  from  no  fewer  than  twenty- 
nine  English  counties,  besides  the  Welsh  county  of 
Caermarthen.  Northumberland  and  Yorkshire  were 
represented,  so  were  Sussex  and  Kent ;  Cornwall  and 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  113 

Devon  sent  of  their  people  as  did  also  Norfolk  and 
Suflfolk ;  the  North  and  South  Midlands  as  well  as 
Lancashire  and  Lincoln. 

During  the  last  three  or  four  years  of  Elizabeth's 
life  there  was  a  kind  of  truce  between  the  Church 
and  the  puritans.  It  was  known  that  King  James 
would,  in  the  event  of  the  death  of  the  Queen,  who 
was  now  advanced  in  years,  succeed  to  the  English 
throne,  and  as  he  had  been  brought  up  among  the 
presbyterians  of  Scotland,  changes  might  be  imminent 
The  puritans  were  hopeful  of  his  favour,  and  when  he 
did  succeed  and  was  on  his  way  to  London,  they  met 
him  at  Hinchinbrook  and  presented  what  was  called 
the  Millenary  Petition,  as  being  supposed  to  be  signed 
by  a  thousand  of  the  English  puritan  clergy,  pleading 
for  further  reforms  in  the  puritan  direction.  Nothing 
came  of  this,  however,  and  the  result  of  the  Hampton 
Court  Conference  was  equally  disappointing.  The 
Ejng  let  them  state  their  case  and  then  bluntly  told 
them  that  if  that  was  all  they  had  to  say  they  must 
either  conform  or  go.  Subscription  to  the  whole 
Prayer  Book  and  Articles,  which  was  the  special 
achievement  of  Elizabeth's  reign,  was  still  to  be 
enforced ;  and  to  this  were  to  be  added  the  Canons 
made  by  Convocation  of  1604,  which  were  to  be  the 
contribution  to  Church  order  to  signalise  the  reign 
of  James.  Some  of  these  canons  were  old  and 
some  were  new.    They  asserted  again  the  Church 

B.  8 


114  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

of  England  to  be  the  true  and  Catholic  Church  of 
this  realm,  and  any  one  denying  this  would  be  ipso 
facto  excommunicate  ;  so  would  all  objectors  to  the 
Prayer  Book,  and  those  who  said  that  the  govern- 
ment of  the  Church  by  archbishops  and  bishops  was 
repugnant  to  the  Word  of  God.  And  in  those  days 
excommunication  meant  more  than  spiritual  de- 
privation. It  meant  that  he  who  was  subjected  to 
that  penalty  must  not  merely  be  turned  out  of  the 
congregation  of  the  faithful,  but  as  a  citizen  would 
be  rendered  incapable  of  suing  for  his  lawful  debts, 
and  be  liable  to  be  imprisoned  for  life  by  process  of 
the  civil  courts,  or  until  reconciled  to  the  Church  ; 
and  when  he  died  would  be  degradingly  denied 
Christian  burial.  Bancroft,  who  on  the  death  of 
Whitgift  had  succeeded  to  the  See  of  Canterbury, 
shewed  no  lack  of  zeal  in  enforcing  these  canons. 
He  renewed  the  use  of  copes,  surplices,  caps  and 
hoods,  according  to  the  Jlrst  Service  Book  of 
Edward  VI,  and  he  obliged  the  clergy  to  subscribe 
over  again  the  three  Articles  of  Whitgift,  which  by 
Canon  xxxvi  they  were  to  declare  they  did  *  willingly 
and  from  the  heart'  As  the  result  of  this  further 
action  more  than  300  ministers  were  silenced  or 
deprived,  some  by  excommunication,  and  others  by 
being  forced  to  leave  the  country  and  go  into 
banishment 

But  note  must  now  be  taken  of  the  fact  that 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  116 

James  summoned  a  new  Parliament  in  January,  and 
Parliament  under  James  proved  to  be  more  inde- 
pendent than  it  had  dared  to  be  under  Elizabeth. 
Before  granting  supplies  they  first  demanded  redress 
of  gi'ievances,  and  further  claimed  the  privileges  of 
the  Commons  of  England  not  as  a  matter  of  grace, 
but  as  their  lawful  inheritance.  It  soon  became  clear 
that  a  new  era  had  dawned.  Elizabeth  even  had 
scarcely  been  able  to  restrain  Parliament  from  de- 
bating the  subject  of  the  state  of  the  Church  of 
England,  James  could  not  restrain  them  at  all.  For 
a  majority  of  the  Commons  were  puritans,  not  in  the 
sense  of  those  of  a  later  time  who  were  opposed  on 
principle  to  government  by  bishops  and  to  the  use 
of  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  but  in  the  sense  that 
they  wished  that  men  who  had  scruples  of  conscience 
should  be  allowed  some  latitude,  and  they  were  of 
opinion  that  it  was  of  more  importance  to  secure 
effective  preachers  and  a  resident  clergy,  than  to 
contend  for  a  rigid  observance  of  form  and  ceremony. 
Bills  for  providing  a  learned  and  godly  ministry  and 
for  abating  pluralities  were  brought  in  and  passed  by 
the  Commons,  but  were  thrown  out  in  the  Lords. 
On  May  30,  the  King  came  down  to  Parliament  and 
rebuked  the  Commons  for  intrusion  upon  his  pre- 
rogative, as  Elizabeth  would  have  done,  but  he  was 
not  met  as  she  was.  They  were  not  willing  to  ac- 
knowledge that  they  had  exceeded   their  powers. 

8—2 


lie  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

On  the  contrary,  in  respectful  terms  they  asserted 
that  their  privileges  were  their  due  inheritance  no 
less  than  their  lands  and  goods,  and  further  declared 
that  these  privileges  had  been  more  dangerously  im- 
pugned than  at  any  former  time,  their  freedom  of 
speech  impaired  by  many  reproofs,  and  their  House 
made  contemptible  in  the  eyes  of  the  world.  As  to 
the  Church  they  expressly  denied  the  power  of  the 
Crown  to  'alter  religion'  or  to  make  any  law  con- 
cerning it  otherwise  than  by  consent  of  Parliament. 
This  theory  of  government  ran  directly  counter  to 
that  held  by  the  King,  who  claimed  that  kingly  power 
admitted  of  no  restraint  by  law.  Here  were  two 
opposing  theories  admitting  of  no  reconciliation ; 
and  Parliament  placed  theirs  on  record  in  strenuous 
and  unmistakable  language :  *  The  prerogatives  of 
princes,'  said  they,  '  may  easily  and  do  daily  grow : 
the  privileges  of  subjects  are,  for  the  most  part,  at 
an  everlasting  stand,  and  being  once  lost  are  not 
recovered  but  with  much  disquiet.'  It  has  been  well 
said  that  this  which  had  been  the  history  of  France, 
of  Castile,  of  Aragon,  and  of  other  continental 
kingdoms  might  have  been  the  history  of  England. 
Absolute  monarchies  had  elsewhere  risen  on  the  ruins 
of  national  liberties,  and  this  might  have  been  the 
fate  of  England  too  but  for  the  patriotic  spirit  of  her 
statesmen.  Said  a  parliamentary  orator  in  1625 : 
*We  are  the  last  monarchy  in  Christendom  that 
maintains  its  rights.' 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  117 

In  this  great  and  far-reaching  controversy  the 
nation  at  large  had  to  choose  sides  as  to  whether 
Church  and  State  should  be  controlled  by  the  re- 
presentatives of  the  people  or  by  the  will  of  the 
King.  The  choice  was  made.  Convocation  adopted 
the  principle  that  resistance  to  the  Sovereign  is  in  all 
cases  condemned  by  the  law  of  God.  Church  and 
King  joined  hands  on  the  doctrine  of  passive 
obedience  and  non-resistance ;  the  puritans  and 
Parliament  in  maintaining  the  principles  of  constitu- 
tional government.  In  this  fateful  severance  there 
was  involved  the  history  of  the  coming  time,  the 
origin  of  contending  parties  in  the  State,  the  out- 
break of  Civil  War  and  the  consequent  downfall  of 
the  hierarchical  constitution  of  the  Church. 

Charles  I  succeeded  to  the  throne  of  England  on 
the  death  of  his  father  in  1625,  and  in  one  dangerous 
direction  proceeded  to  tread  in  his  steps.  James, 
when  refused  supplies  by  Parliament  until  after 
redress  of  grievances,  resorted  again  and  again  to 
unconstitutional  methods  of  obtaining  the  money  he 
needed  for  his  wars.  He  imposed  taxes  on  imports 
by  his  own  authority ;  these  impositions  being  chiefly 
laid  on  articles  of  luxury  or  on  foreign  manufactures 
which  competed  with  native  industry.  Later  on  he 
asked  for  loans,  and  then  sought  for  benevolences. 
Letters  were  written  to  every  county  and  borough 
asking  for  voluntary  gifts  for  the  needs  of  the  King, 


118  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

but  at  the  end  of  two  months  only  £500  was  sub- 
scribed in  reply,  and  after  two  years  of  continuous 
pressure  only  £66,000  had  been  raised  altogether. 
King  Charles,  his  son  and  successor,  when  he  came 
to  the  throne  travelled  along  the  same  unconstitu- 
tional road,  with  this  difference  only  that  he  travelled 
faster  and  farther.  Without  authority  of  Parliament 
he  exacted  tonnage  and  poundage,  demanded  a  loan 
of  £100,000  from  the  city  of  London,  which,  on  being 
refused,  he  changed  for  a  forced  loan  equal  in  amount 
to  five  subsidies,  about  £350,000.  Refusal  in  this 
case  was  visited  with  punishment,  gentlemen  being 
sent  to  prison  and  ordinary  men  enlisted  as  soldiers. 
Other  means  of  raising  money  were  resorted  to  also, 
one  being  the  levying  of  shipmoney  upon  all  the 
counties,  a  tax  hitherto  only  laid  upon  the  maritime 
counties  and  that  in  time  of  war  merely.  Strong  was 
the  resentment  and  loud  the  discontent  of  the  nation 
at  these  proceedings. 

But  while  some  were  protesting,  the  Court  section 
of  the  clergy  took  sides  with  the  King  and  began  to 
exalt  the  royal  prerogative.  Dr  Sibthorpe  of  Burton 
Latimer,  in  his  assize  sermon  at  Northampton,  main- 
tained that  the  King  possessed  legislative  power  and 
that  all  resistance  to  the  royal  will  was  actually  sinful. 
Dr  Mainwaring  also,  in  a  sermon  preached  before  the 
King  himself,  denied  that  the  consent  of  Parliament 
was  necessary  to  taxation.    For  this  oiFence  the  Lords 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  119 

imprisoned  and  deprived  him,  but  the  King  at  once 
pardoned  him  and  gave  him  the  rectory  of  Stanford 
Rivers.  This  was  in  1628,  and  on  January  20,  1629, 
Parliament  assembled,  the  third  of  the  reign,  meeting 
the  King  in  no  friendly  mood. 

When  business  began  other  matters  besides  taxa- 
tion came  up  for  debate.  In  a  Declaration  the 
previous  November,  the  King  had  ratified  and  con- 
firmed the  Articles  as  containing  the  true  doctrine 
of  the  Church  of  England,  and  by  way  of  putting  an 
end  to  the  curious  and  unhappy  diflferences  so  long 
prevailing  in  the  Church,  enjoined  all  preachers  to 
keep  to  them  and  put  all  curious  search  aside. 
Sir  John  Eliot  pointed  out  that  this  enjoining  of 
silence  was  one-sided,  for  while  limiting  the  puritan 
it  gave  full  freedom  to  the  Anglo-Catholic.  On 
January  26,  a  Committee  on  Religion  was  formed  to 
consider  the  subject  of  religious  grievances,  which 
formulated  a  series  of  resolutions  to  be  brought 
before  the  House.  They  pointed  to  the  threatening 
dangers  from  the  growth  of  Popery,  and  to  the 
fact  that  Anglo-Catholicism,  which  they  called  the 
Arminian  faction,  was  separating  them  from  the 
Reformed  Churches  abroad  and  bringing  divisions 
at  home.  They  drew  attention  to  the  introduction 
of  new  ceremonies  in  worship,  to  the  erection  of 
altars  in  place  of  communion  tables  ;  to  the  bringing 
men  to  question  and  trouble  for  not  standing  up  at 


120  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  Gloria  Patri ;  to  the  publishing  of  books  and 
the  preaching  of  sermons  contrary  to  the  orthodox 
doctrine,  while  books  and  sermons  from  the  other 
side  were  rigidly  suppressed.  They  further  pleaded 
that  bishoprics  and  other  preferments  should  not  be 
conferred  upon  those  who  practised  superstitious 
ceremonies,  but  upon  learned,  pious  and  orthodox 
men  ;  that  non-residence  of  clergy  be  put  a  stop  to, 
and  means  be  provided  for  maintaining  a  godly,  able 
minister  in  every  parisL  The  King  took  alarm  at 
these  resolutions  and  ordered  an  adjournment  of  the 
House,  and  again,  on  the  2nd  of  March,  the  Speaker 
declared  the  King's  pleasure  that  it  should  be  ad- 
journed until  the  10th.  He  was  met  with  cries  of 
*  No  ! '  and  Eliot  rose  to  speak.  The  Speaker  said  he 
had  an  absolute  command  from  the  King  to  leave 
the  chair  if  any  one  spoke ;  he  was,  however,  held 
down  in  the  chair  by  main  force  ;  Eliot  asserted  the 
right  of  the  House  to  adjourn  itself ;  the  doors  were 
locked  and  three  resolutions  were  put  to  the  vote 
and  carried  by  acclamation.  These  were :  (1)  That 
whosoever  shall  bring  in  innovations  in  religion,  or 
opinions  disagreeing  from  the  true  and  orthodox 
Church  should  be  reputed  a  capital  enemy  to  this 
kingdom  and  the  commonwealth ;  (2)  Whosoever 
should  counsel  or  advise  the  levying  of  taxes  and 
subsidies  not  being  granted  by  Parliament  should 
be  reputed  an  innovator  in  the  government  and  a 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  121 

capital  enemy  to  the  State ;  and  (3)  That  any 
merchant  or  person  voluntarily  paying  such  taxes 
and  subsidies  not  being  granted  by  Parliament  should 
be  reputed  a  betrayer  of  the  liberties  of  England 
and  an  enemy  to  the  same.  Nine  members  of  the 
House  of  Commons  were  imprisoned  for  their  part 
in  these  proceedings  ;  Parliament  was  dissolved  and 
then  for  eleven  years  England  was  governed  without 
any  Parliament  at  all.  The  significant  fact  about 
that  eventful  day  in  Parliament  was  that  in  the  three 
resolutions  passed,  there  was  a  union  of  religious  dis- 
content and  political  discontent.  Elizabeth's  policy 
had  created  a  religious  opposition,  and  the  policy  of 
James  and  Charles  had  created  a  political  opposition ; 
and  by  the  three  resolutions  of  March  2,  1629,  these 
two  causes  had  become  one,  and  out  of  this  union 
came  the  Long  Parliament  of  1640,  and  the  Civil 
War,  with  the  consequent  downfall  of  Church  and 
King. 

During  the  long  years  when  England  was  under 
the  personal  government  of  Charles  I,  the  Church 
continued  to  pursue  the  course  dictated  to  it  by 
Archbishop  Laud.  As  a  man  after  the  King's  own 
heart  he  had  received  preferment  after  preferment, 
rising  rapidly  to  power  till  he  had  attained  to  the 
highest  position  in  the  Church,  and  had  become  the 
King's  most  trusted  ecclesiastical  adviser.  A  martinet 
in  aU  matters  of  form  and  ceremony,  and  unweariedly 


122  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

at  work,  his  influence  was  felt  at  every  point.  Nothing 
was  too  great  for  him  to  aim  at,  nothing  too  minute 
for  him  to  care  for.  He  had  untiring  perseverance, 
the  instinct  of  order  and  a  passion  for  detail.  He 
was  just  as  earnest  and  persistent  in  getting  rails 
erected  round  the  communion  table  of  the  parish 
church  and  compelling  the  people  to  kneel  there, 
as  he  was  in  trying  to  revolutionize  the  religion  of 
the  whole  realm  of  Scotland  by  bringing  it  over  from 
Presbyterianism  to  Episcopacy. 

Laud's  policy  was  the  one  prominent  and  pre- 
eminent fact  in  the  history  of  the  Church  of  England 
during  the  years  between  1629  and  1640.  Among 
the  clergy  he  prohibited  the  least  manifestation  of 
nonconformity  or  individuality.  They  were  no  longer 
to  be  permitted  to  omit  this  or  that  prayer  at 
pleasure,  to  stand  when  they  were  bidden  to  kneel, 
or  to  kneel  when  they  were  bidden  to  stand.  So  far 
as  the  laity  were  concerned  they  were  to  be  treated 
as  children  and  made  to  subject  their  own  individuality 
to  that  of  their  spiritual  pastors  and  masters ;  were 
forbidden  to  leave  their  own  parish  church,  to  attend 
even  episcopal  services  elsewhere.  In  parish  after 
parish  puritan  ministers  were  compelled,  contrary  to 
the  established  custom,  to  set  the  communion  table 
altar- wise,  to  place  altar-rails,  and  require  the  people 
to  come  from  their  seats  and  receive  the  sacrament 
kneeling. 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  123 

As  the  records  of  the  time  shew,  this  last  require- 
ment raised  a  burning  question  as  between  Puritan 
and  Anglo-Catholic.  Was  the  communion  table  a 
table  or  an  altar  ?  Should  it  be  placed  in  the  body 
of  the  church  or  chancel  or  set  altar- wise  at  the  east 
end?  In  Elizabeth's  time  a  compromise  had  been 
come  to  which  was  substantially  adopted  in  the 
Canons  of  1604  to  the  eflfect  that  the  table  should 
stand  in  the  church  where  the  altar  stood  before  the 
Reformation,  except  at  the  celebration  of  the  Com- 
munion, when  it  was  to  be  brought  out  and  placed 
where  the  communicants  could  most  conveniently  see 
and  hear  the  minister.  And  in  nearly  all  the  parish 
churches  it  kept  its  place  in  the  middle  of  the  church 
or  chancel,  and  any  attempt  to  remove  it  was  resented 
by  the  parishioners  as  a  step  towards  popery.  In 
St  Gregory's  Church,  St  Paul's,  the  dean  and  chapter 
had  placed  the  table  in  the  east  end  setting  rails 
before  it,  whereupon  five  parishioners  appealed  to 
the  Court  of  Arches  against  this  proceeding.  The 
King  himself  then  appeared  on  the  scene,  summoned 
the  five  before  the  Privy  Council  and  sharply  told 
them  that  the  placing  of  the  communion  table  was 
no  business  of  theirs.  This  was  in  1633,  and  in  1635, 
Archbishop  Laud  gave  orders  that  the  table  should 
in  all  churches  be  moved  to  the  east  end  and  be 
railed  in.  This  order  was  met  by  stout  resistance. 
The   churchwardens   of   Beckington    were    excom- 


124  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

municated  for  refusing  to  obey,  and  thrown  into 
prison.  The  opposition  was  especially  strong  in  the 
dioceses  of  Lincoln  and  Norwich.  In  spite  of  re- 
sistance, however,  in  parish  after  parish  Laud  carried 
his  way,  but  with  disastrous  results  to  the  best 
interests  of  the  Church, 

In  1634  the  archbishop  revived  the  long  disused 
claim  to  Metropolitical  Visitation,  sending  his  vicar- 
general  to  report  upon  the  ecclesiastical  condition  of 
the  province  of  Canterbury.  This  was  Sir  Nathaniel 
Brent,  who  began  with  the  diocese  of  Lincoln  and 
worked  his  way  southwards.  He  unearthed  strange 
doings  and  met  with  curious  experiences.  He  also 
carried  out  some  much-needed  reforms ;  for  he  had 
to  report  that  ale-houses,  hounds  and  swine  were 
kept  in  churchyards ;  that  copes  and  vestments  had 
been  embezzled ;  that  clandestine  marriages  were 
celebrated  by  the  clergy,  and  that  both  clergy  and 
laity  were  much  given  to  drunkenness.  His  chief 
attentions,  however,  were  bestowed  upon  the  puritan 
portion  of  the  clergy.  He  reports  'at  Huntingdon 
divers  ministers  in  that  division  were  suspected  of 
puritanisme ' ;  and  of  Bedford,  which  he  reached  on 
the  26th  of  August,  he  says,  'Mr  Peter  Bulkeley, 
rector  of  Odell,  suspected  for  puritanisme  was  sus- 
pended for  non-appearance.  He  came  to  me  at 
Aylesburie,  where  he  confessed  he  never  used  the 
surplisse  or  the  cross  in  baptisme.    He  is  to  appear 


ABSOLUTISM  AND  LIBERTY  125 

in  the  High  Commission  Court  the  first  court  day  in 
November,  if  he  reform  not  before.'  Peter  Bulkeley, 
who  was  of  resolute  puritan  stock — his  sister  also 
being  the  mother  of  Oliver  St  John,  who  was  after- 
wards Cromwell's  Lord  Chief  Justice — resolved  to 
leave  the  country  rather  than  conform.  The  Pilgrim 
Fathers,  who  had  sailed  from  Leyden  and  founded 
the  old  Plymouth  Colony  in  New  England  in  1620, 
were  followed  ten  years  later  by  other  Englishmen 
of  puritan  faith,  who  founded  the  towns  round 
Massachusetts  Bay  and  along  the  Connecticut  River, 
exercising  a  powerful  influence  upon  the  future  of 
American  religious  life.  There  were  among  them 
laymen  possessed  of  wealth  and  social  position,  and 
many  ministers  who  had  occupied  influential  positions 
in  the  Church.  Between  1629  and  1640  about  ninety 
university  men,  three-fourths  of  them  from  Cam- 
bridge, had  emigrated.  Of  these  Cambridge  men, 
while  nine  were  of  Trinity  and  nine  from  St  John's, 
no  fewer  than  twenty-two  were  of  Emmanuel  College, 
the  puritan  foundation  of  Sir  Walter  Mildmay.  In 
this  list  of  twenty-two  are  found  the  great  names 
of  John  Cotton,  Thomas  Hooker,  R  Saltonstall, 
Thomas  Shepard  and  John  Harvard.  It  has  been 
estimated  upon  what  seem  fairly  reliable  data  that 
as  the  result  of  Laud's  administration  some  4000 
puritan  families,  or  an  aggregate  of  over  20,000  persona 
went  over  to  New  England.    With  the  exception  of 


126  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  Pilgrim  Fathers,  who  sailed  in  the  Mayflower  in 
1620,  these  were  not  Separatists.  Francis  Higginson, 
vicar  of  one  of  the  five  parishes  of  Leicester,  who 
sailed  with  the  first  party  in  1629,  may  be  taken  as 
representative  of  all  the  rest.  As  the  ship  was  oflf 
the  Land's  End,  he  and  his  companions  stood  on  deck 
to  take  the  last  farewell  look  of  the  land  they  were 
leaving  and  which  they  loved  so  well.  Standing  there 
and  looking  eastward  till  the  coastline  faded  out  of 
sight,  he  said :  'We  will  not  say  as  the  Separatists 
were  wont  to  say  at  their  leaving  of  England,  "  Fare- 
well, Babylon,  farewell,  Rome,"  but  we  will  say, 
"Farewell,  dear  England,  farewell,  the  Church  of 
God  in  England,  and  all  the  Christian  friends  there." 
We  do  not  go  to  New  England  as  Separatists  from 
the  Church  of  England,  though  we  cannot  but  separate 
from  the  corruptions  in  it.' 


VI 

PURITANISM  IN  ITS   TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL 

Through  the  series  of  years  during  which  Charles  I 
was  governing  England  without  Parliament,  and  Laud 
was  harassing  both  clergy  and  laity  by  his  high- 
handed ways,  the  forces  of  opposition  were  steadily 
gaining  strength  against  them  both.  On  the  con- 
stitutional question  the  significant  words  of  Sir  John 
Eliot,  spoken  when  the  struggle  began,  had  not  been 
forgotten,  when  he  said — 'Upon  this  dispute  not 
alone  our  goods  and  lands  are  engaged,  but  all  that 
we  call  ours.  Those  rights,  those  privileges  which 
meule  our  fathers  free  men  are  in  question.'  On  the 
religious  question  also  there  was  deepening  deter- 
mination to  resist  ecclesiastical  oppression,  and 
puritanism  was  steadily  growing  in  numbers  and 
influence.  These  two  forces  were  now  making  common 
cause  with  each  other  against  the  day  of  reckoning. 
That  day  came  when  on  the  3rd  of  November,  1640, 
that  Long  Parliament  assembled  which  was  to  change 
so  much  before  it  reached  its  end.  The  King  was 
urgent  for  a  money  grant  to  relieve  him  of  the 


128  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

consequences  of  his  Scottish  war,  but  the  Conunons 
being  in  no  conciliatory  mood  demanded  redress  of 
grievances  before  voting  supply.  And  as  in  their 
view  the  religious  grievance  took  precedence  of  the 
constitutional,  they  concentrated  their  attack  upon 
the  Canons  recently  passed  in  Convocation.  A  Com- 
mittee of  twenty-four  was  appointed  to  prepare 
a  Declaration  on  the  State  of  the  Kingdom,  the  Book 
of  Canons  being  referred  to  the  Grand  Committee  for 
Religion. 

Meantime  an  ominous  petition  against  Episcopacy 
was  presented  to  the  House  by  citizens  of  London 
which  was  signed  by  15,000  persons,  its  delivery  in 
Westminster  Hall  being  attended  by  no  fewer  than 
1500  gentlemen  of  the  city.  This  document,  known 
as  the  Root-and-Branch  petition  is  to  be  distinguished 
from  the  Root-and-Branch  Bill  of  the  following  May. 
It  covered  a  wide  range  of  ecclesiastical  grievances. 
Among  the  evils  complained  of  was  the  silencing  of 
so  many  faithful,  diligent  and  powerful  ministers 
because  they  could  not  in  conscience  submit  to  the 
needless  devices  of  the  bishops ;  and  also  the  great 
increase  of  idle,  lewd,  dissolute  and  ignorant  ministers. 
The  petitioners  also  protested  against  the  great  and 
growing  conformity  of  the  Church  of  England  to  the 
Church  of  Rome  in  vestures,  postures,  ceremonies 
and  administrations.  Entering  into  detail  they 
objected  to  the  bowing  towards  the  altar,  and  the 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  129 

setting  of  images,  crucifixes  and  conceits  over  it  or 
tapers  upon  it ;  they  misliked  and  protested  against 
the  christening  and  consecrating  of  buildings,  fonts, 
tables,  pulpits,  chalices  and  churchyards,  thereby 
putting  holiness  upon  things  inanimate.  Finally, 
besides  other  grievances,  they  complained  of  in- 
quisitorial proceedings  extending  even  to  men's 
thoughts ;  the  apprehending  and  detaining  men  by 
pursuivants  ;  the  frequent  suspending  and  depriving 
of  ministers ;  the  fining  and  imprisonment  of  all  sorts 
of  people ;  and  other  outrages  contrary  to  the  laws 
of  the  realm  and  the  subjects'  liberties.  This  petition 
from  London  was  followed  by  others  from  the  counties 
of  Kent,  Essex  and  Sufiblk,  that  from  Kent  having 
2500  names  attached. 

A  month  later  there  followed  the  document  known 
as  the  'Ministers'  Petition  and  Remonstrance,'  setting 
forth  their  grievances  from  their  own  point  of  view. 
They  denied  that  diocesan  bishops  are  a  divine 
institution  and  objected  to  their  assuming  sole  power 
of  ordination  and  jurisdiction ;  they  objected  also 
to  the  delegation  of  the  bishops'  power  to  unmeet 
persons ;  to  the  imposing  of  the  oath  of  canonical 
obedience  and  the  enforcing  of  subscription ;  to  the 
demanding  of  exorbitant  fees  on  institution  to  a 
living ;  and,  finally,  they  objected  to  the  judicial 
power  of  the  bishops  in  Parliament,  in  the  Star 
Chamber,  in  the  Commissions  of  the  Peace  and  at 


130  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  Council  Table.  These  petitions  were  followed  by 
others,  from  no  fewer  than  eleven  counties,  for  the 
abolition  of  Episcopacy,  that  from  Suflfblk  having  as 
many  as  4400  names  attached,  and  that  from  Norfolk 
2000.  These  various  petitions  were  all  referred  to 
the  Committee  of  twenty-four,  out  of  which  to 
prepare  heads  for  the  consideration  of  the  House. 
The  following  May  the  Houses  passed  a  Bill 
depriving  the  King  of  the  power  to  dissolve  Parliament 
without  its  own  consent,  and  on  the  27th  of  the  same 
month,  Sir  E.  Bering,  the  member  for  Kent,  moved 
the  first  reading  of  the  Root-and-Branch  Bill  entitled 
*An  Act  for  the  utter  abolishing  and  taking  away 
of  all  archbishops,  bishops,  their  chancellors,  com- 
missaries, deans,  deans  and  chapters,  archdeacons,  pre- 
bendaries, chanters  and  canons  and  all  other  their 
under  oflBcers.'  In  doing  this  he  spoke  regretfully  of 
the  necessity  he  felt  to  be  laid  upon  him.  '  I  never 
was  for  ruin,'  he  said,  'so  long  as  I  could  hope  any 
hope  of  reforming.  My  hopes  that  way  are  now 
almost  withered  When  this  Bill  is  perfected  I  shall 
give  a  sad  "Aye"  to  it.'  The  Bill  was  read  a  second 
time  the  same  day  by  a  majority  of  139  to  108  and 
referred  to  a  Committee  of  the  whole  House.  Here, 
after  dealing  with  the  preamble,  they  proceeded  to 
the  consideration  of  the  clause  for  abolishing  the 
offices  of  archbishops,  bishops  and  the  rest  of  the 
superior  clergy  ;    and  then,  on   June   15,  with  the 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  131 

question  of  deans  and  chapters,  recording  their 
decision  that  these  officers  be  taken  out  of  the  Church 
and  their  lands  appropriated  to  the  advancement  of 
learning  and  piety.  It  was  further  decided  that  the 
Ecclesiastical  Courts  should  cease  from  and  after  the 
1st  of  August ;  and  that  to  replace  the  government 
thus  superseded,  the  whole  jurisdiction  should  be  in 
the  hands  of  nine  chief  commissioners  who  should 
appoint  five  ministers  in  every  county  for  purposes  of 
ordination. 

At  this  point  the  Bill  rested  in  Committee,  for 
grave  matters  were  felt  to  be  impending,  the  King 
having  announced  his  intention  to  visit  Scotland, 
from  which  serious  questions  would  be  likely  to  arise. 
Parliament,  having  resumed,  proceeded  to  deal  with 
Laud's  innovations.  Commissions  were  appointed  to 
visit  the  various  counties  for  the  defacing,  demolishing 
and  quite  taking  away  of  all  images,  altars,  or  tables 
turned  altar-wise,  crucifixes,  superstitious  pictures, 
ornaments  and  relics  of  idolatry  out  of  all  churches 
and  chapels.  These  orders  passed,  the  House  adjourned 
to  October  20. 

Parliament,  on  reassembling,  addressed  itself  first 
of  all  to  what  is  known  as  the  Grand  Remonstrance, 
which  was  practically  a  long  indictment  of  the  King's 
conduct  ever  since  his  accession,  to  which  he  only 
replied  by  speaking  disdainfully  of  their  proposed 
ecclesiastical  reforms.    This  he  followed  up  by  the 

9—2 


132  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

attempted  Arrest  of  the  Five  Members  who  had 
taken  a  leading  part  in  formulating  the  Remonstrance. 
Though  he  was  baffled  in  this,  it  practically  brought 
on  a  crisis  from  which  he  felt  there  could  be  no 
escape  but  by  an  appeal  to  arms.  On  the  22nd  of 
August,  therefore,  Charles  I  set  up  the  royal  standard 
on  Nottingham  Hill,  and  called  upon  all  loyal  subjects 
to  come  to  his  aid  against  a  rebellious  Parliament. 
Once  more,  therefore,  the  nation  was  plunged  into 
Civil  War,  the  allegiance  of  the  people  being 
challenged,  not  as  in  the  Wars  of  the  Roses,  by  rival 
Houses,  but  claimed  by  the  rival  authorities  oiF  King 
and  Parliament.  It  was  not  a  Social  War,  but  one  of 
those  conflicts  of  ideas  that  recur  at  intervals  in  the 
course  of  history,  and  always  with  tragic  issue.  For 
in  a  conflict  of  ideas  the  noblest  minds,  because  of 
their  very  nobility  are  resolutely  averse  to  com- 
promise, and  cannot  reconcile  themselves  to  defeat. 
This  war  was  for  sovereign  right  on  the  part  of  the 
people  as  well  as  on  that  of  the  King.  Colonel 
Hutchinson  said  that  it  was  on  the  question  of  civil 
right  he  joined  with  the  Parliament,  and  though  he 
was  satisfied  the  endeavours  of  their  opponents 
tended  to  subvert  the  protestant  religion,  'he  did 
not  think  that  so  clear  a  ground  for  the  war  as  the 
defence  of  English  liberties.'  Cromwell  also  speaking 
on  the  subject  twelve  years  after  the  war  broke  out, 
said  distinctly  that  'Religion  was  not  the  thing  at 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  133 

first  contested  for,  but  God  brought  it  to  that  issue 
at  last,  and  at  last  it  proved  to  be  that  which  was 
most  dear  to  us.'  And  certainly,  as  we  follow  the 
course  of  events,  it  becomes  clear  that  it  was  not 
Presbyterianism  that  brought  on  the  war,  but  the  war 
that  brought  in  Presbyterianism.  This  system  became 
organised  in  England  in  the  seventeenth  century,  not 
as  a  matter  of  national  preference,  but  of  military 
necessity.  For  by  the  end  of  1643  the  outlook  for 
the  parliamentary  party,  so  far  as  the  war  was 
concerned,  was  most  depressing.  The  west,  with  few 
exceptions,  had  declared  for  the  King,  so  had  the 
north  with  the  exception  of  Hull  and  Lancashire,  and 
while  Parliament  had  gained  strength  in  the  eastern 
counties,  it  held  the  midlands  only  with  difficulty. 

In  anxious  condition  the  puritans  turned  to  their 
brethren  in  Scotland,  and  in  November,  1643,  the 
Scottish  Parliament  agreed  to  send  21,000  men  to 
their  assistance,  but  only  on  the  understanding  that 
the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant  should  be  accepted 
in  England  as  it  had  been  in  Scotland,  and  so  pledge 
the  two  nations  to  unite  for  the  reformation  of 
religion  according  to  the  Word  of  God  and  the 
example  of  the  best  Reformed  Churches.  There  were 
many  in  England  who  were  willing  to  modify  or  even 
set  aside  Episcopacy,  but  there  were  many  also  who 
favoured  congregational  independence,  which  would 
be  as  rigorously  repressed  under  the  Scottish  system 


134  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

as  it  had  been  under  the  bishops ;  and  there  were 
few  who  were  willing  to  introduce  into  England  the 
inquisitorial  jurisdiction  exercised  by  the  Church 
courts  in  Scotland.  The  necessity,  however,  was 
urgent ;  military  help  must  be  had  and  it  could  only 
be  had  on  the  terms  offered.  When  it  had  passed 
both  Houses,  the  Commons  and  the  Assembly  of 
Divines  swore  to  the  Solemn  League  and  Covenant 
on  September  25  ;  and  somewhat  later  the  few  Peers 
who  still  lingered  at  Westminster  swore  to  it  also. 
The  following  February  it  was  universally  imposed 
upon  all  Englishmen  over  eighteen  years  of  age,  the 
names  of  those  refusing  to  be  formally  certified. 

The  General  Assembly  in  Edinburgh  having  laid  it 
down  that  there  could  be  no  hope  of  unity  in  religion 
till  there  be  one  form  of  ecclesiastical  government,  a 
parliamentary  ordinance  was  passed  on  August  19, 
1645,  for  the  setting  up  of  Presbyterian  government 
as  the  national  form  of  religion.  The  parish  churches 
of  London,  one  hundred  and  thirty-seven  in  number, 
were  to  be  arranged  in  twelve  classes,  the  Chapel  of 
the  Rolls,  the  two  Serjeants'  Inns,  and  the  four  Inns  of 
Court  together  making  up  the  thirteenth.  For  the 
country  at  large  county  committees  were  to  map  out 
classical  districts,  the  several  classes  as  approved  by 
Parliament  to  have  power  to  constitute  congregational 
elderships.  These  elderships  corresponding  to  the 
Kirk  session  of  the  Scottish  Church  were  to  meet 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  135 

once  a  week,  the  classes  corresponding  to  the 
presbytery  once  a  month,  the  provincial  synod  twice 
a  year,  and  the  National  Assembly  to  meet  in  session 
as  summoned  by  Parliament  and  not  otherwise.  By 
a  second  parliamentary  ordinance  dated  March  14, 
1646,  it  was  commanded  that  a  choice  of  elders  be 
made  forthwith  throughout  the  kingdom  of  England 
and  dominion  of  Wales,  in  their  respective  churches 
and  chapels.  Thus,  so  far  as  legislation  was  concerned, 
but  no  further,  the  new  presbyterian  system  was 
ready  to  become  an  actual  reality  in  the  national 
life. 

The  system  of  Church  government  thus  made 
absolute  by  ordinance  of  Parliament  was  sufficiently 
rigid.  Its  basis  was,  of  course,  parochial.  Every 
parishioner  living  within  a  given  area  was  required 
to  take  his  place  in  the  parochial  organisation  and 
submit  to  the  parochial  authorities.  Every  parish 
congregation  was  to  choose  its  representative  to  sit 
in  the  Provincial  or  National  Assembly,  and  no 
ecclesiastical  community  except  that  of  the  parish 
was  to  be  allowed  to  exist.  This  was  altogether  too 
narrow  for  some  who  had  been  fighting  for  freedom 
as  against  King  and  prelate  ;  and  Oliver  Cromwell 
obtained  an  Order  from  the  House  that  an  endeavour 
should  be  made  to  find  some  way  how  far  'tender 
consciences  who  cannot  in  all  things  submit  to  the 
common  rule  which  shall  be  established,  may  be 


136  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

borne  with  according  to  the  Word  and  as  may  stand 
with  the  public  peace.'  Baillie,  one  of  the  Scottish 
commissioners,  writes  :  '  This  order  presentlie  gave  us 
the  alarm.  We  saw  it  was  a  toleration  of  the  Inde- 
pendents by  Act  of  Parliament  before  the  Presbytery 
was  established-'  However,  when  the  matter  came 
up  again,  on  report  of  committee,  Cromwell's  proposal 
to  consider  tender  consciences  was  negatived  without 
division.  This  was  on  the  6th  of  January,  1645,  and 
on  the  13th  the  House  gave  its  assent  to  the  ordinary 
presbyterian  system  by  a  resolution  that  parochial 
congregations  should  be  combined  in  groups  under 
presbyteries. 

The  independents  still  protested  on  behalf  of  a 
freer  system,  and  Jeremiah  Burroughs,  one  of  their 
number,  gave  voice  to  their  feeling  in  a  sermon 
preached  before  the  Lords  in  Westminster  Abbey. 
It  saddened  his  heart,  he  said,  that  those  who  not 
long  since  were  crying  to  heaven  for  deliverance 
should  now  rise  up  to  oppose  a  forbearance  of  their 
brethren  who,  together  with  them,  love  Jesus  Christ, 
and  agree  with  them  in  the  substance  of  worship  and 
the  doctrinal  part  of  religion.  Votes  in  Parliament 
may  have  their  value,  but  the  power  that  rightly 
influences  conscience  is  light  from  the  Word.  'To 
use  force  upon  people,'  he  went  on  to  say,  'before 
they  have  means  to  teach  them  is  to  seek  to  beat  the 
nail  of  authority  without  making  way  by  the  wimble 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  137 

of  instruction.  If  you  have  to  deal  with  rotten  or 
sappy  wood  the  hammer  only  may  make  the  nail 
enter  presently,  but  if  you  meet  with  sound  wood, 
with  heart  of  oak,  though  the  hammer  and  hand  that 
strike  be  strong,  yet  the  nail  will  hardly  go  in.  It 
will  turn  crooked  or  break..,. Consider  you  have  to 
deal  with  English  consciences ;  there  is  no  country  so 
famous  for  firm  strong  oaks  as  England.  You  will 
find  English  consciences  to  be  so.' 

These  words  were  clear  and  strong,  and  they  were 
backed  up  immediately  by  irresistible  facts.  For  on 
the  15th  of  June,  1646,  the  battle  of  Naseby  was  fought 
and  won  by  the  independents,  by  Cromwell  and  the 
army  of  the  New  Model — the  army  which  he  had 
reorganised  by  filling  its  ranks  with  men  of  godly 
principles  and  earnest  purpose.  And  when  they  had 
won  that  decisive  victory,  he  maintained  on  their 
behalf  that  they  were  entitled  to  the  fruits  of  victory 
in  the  shape  of  religious  freedom.  Writing  to  the 
Speaker  of  the  House  of  Commons  from  the  field 
of  battle,  to  announce  the  great  news  of  the  day, 
Cromwell  said :  *  Honest  men  served  you  faithfully 
in  this  action.  Sir,  they  are  trusty  ;  I  beseech  you 
in  the  name  of  Grod  not  to  discourage  them.  He  that 
ventures  his  life  for  the  liberty  of  his  country,  I  wish 
he  trust  God  for  the  liberty  of  his  conscience,  and  you 
for  the  liberty  he  fights  for.' 

But  the  time  of  larger  religious  freedom  was  not 


138  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

yet.    The  battle  of  Naseby  was  fought  on  the  15th  of 
June,  1646,  and  on  the  22nd  of  May,  1647,  a  London 
crowd  was  gathered  round  a  fire  kindled  in  front  of 
the  Royal  Exchange,  to  see  the  sheriffs  of  London  and 
Middlesex  burn  a  petition  which  had  been  circulated 
in  the  city  for  signature,  and  had  given  great  offence 
to  Parliament.   It  was  a  petition  in  favour  of  religious 
freedom,  desiring  that  no  man  might  be  punished  or 
persecuted  as  heretical,  by  judges  that  are  not  in- 
fallible, for  preaching  or  publishing  his  opinions  in 
a  peaceable  way.     For,  upon  pretence  of  suppressing 
errors,  sects  and  schisms,  the  most  necessary  truths 
and  sincere  professions  thereof  may  be  suppressed. 
This  petition  being   brought  to  the  notice  of  the 
House  of  Commons  was  by  resolution  ordered  to  be 
burnt,  and  some  of  those  who  had  signed  it  were  sent 
to  gaol.     There  was  clearly  no  hope  of  larger  liberty 
from  Parliament,  for  there  the  men  who  were  opposed 
to  religious  toleration  were  steadily  gaining  the  upper 
hand.      *  To  let  men  serve   God  according  to  the 
persuasion  of  their  own  consciences,'  wrote  a  presby- 
terian  divine,  'was  to  cast  out  one  devil  that  seven 
worse  might  enter.'     '  We  detest  and  abhor  the  much 
endeavoured  toleration,'  declared  a  meeting  of  the 
London  ministers.     On  the  2nd  of  September,  1646, 
an  ordinance  for  the  suppression  of  blasphemy  and 
heresy  was  introduced  into  the  House  of  Commons 
which  actually  went  the  length  of  proposing  that  any 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  139 

denial  of  the  doctrines  of  the  Trinity  and  the  Incarna- 
tion should  be  punished  by  death,  whilst  denial  of 
other  less  important  doctrines  such  as  those  relating 
to  presbyterian  government  and  Infant  Baptism 
should  be  punished  with  imprisonment  for  life.  This 
atrocious  ordinance  was  actually  read  twice  in  the 
House  of  Commons  without  a  division  and  sent  before 
a  committee  of  the  whole  House,  and  the  Journals 
of  the  House  remain  to  testify  the  fact  [C.  J.  IV.  659]. 
The  Lords  also  drew  up  an  ordinance  forbidding  all 
who  were  not  ordained  ministers  *to  preach  or  ex- 
pound the  Scriptures  in  any  church  or  chapel,  or 
in  any  other  place.'  On  the  31st  of  December,  1646, 
this  ordinance  was  sent  down  to  the  Commons.  The 
independents,  knowing  there  was  no  hope  of  their 
getting  the  measure  rejected,  sought  merely  to  amend 
it,  so  far  at  least  as  to  allow  laymen  to  expound  the 
Scriptures.  Long  and  stormy  was  the  debate  which 
followed  and  when  the  division  came  on,  Cromwell 
himself  acting  as  one  of  the  tellers,  he  and  his  party 
were  defeated  by  105  to  57.  A  further  motion  to 
restrict  the  prohibition  to  places  'appointed  for 
public  worship,'  was  defeated  without  a  division. 

It  is  at  this  point  in  the  history  we  come  upon 
the  line  of  division  between  the  presbyterians  and 
the  independents.  The  Scots  army  finding  that  the 
King  never  really  meant  to  accept  presbyterianism 
prepared   to  leave  the  country.      By  the   11th  of 


140  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

February  every  garrison  had  been  delivered  up, 
every  Scottish  soldier  had  recrossed  the  Tweed,  and 
the  King's  person  had  been  left  in  charge  of  the 
Parliamentary  Commissioners  and  a  guard  of  cavalry 
at  Holmby  House.  Still,  before  his  arrival  there, 
a  number  of  presbyterian  peers  had  agreed  with  him 
to  accept  certain  concessions  he  was  prepared  to 
make  as  the  basis  of  an  agreement,  upon  the  com- 
pletion of  which  Charles  was  to  be  restored  to  Crown 
and  Kingdom.  It  was  the  beginning  of  an  alliance 
between  the  presbyterians  and  the  royalists  which 
thirteen  years  later  was  to  bring  about  the  Restoration 
of  the  Monarchy  and  the  Church.  It  was  also  the 
widening  of  the  divergence  between  presbyterian  and 
independent,  for  if  the  concessions  proposed  were 
admitted,  it  would  mean  the  surrender  of  everything 
for  which  the  independents  had  been  contending  since 
the  war  began.  But  now,  the  army  being  disbanded, 
they  were  powerless  to  resist.  For  all  the  general 
officers  of  the  'New  Model,'  except  Fairfax,  were  to 
be  dismissed;  and  no  Member  of  Parliament  could 
hold  a  commission  in  the  new  army,  or  any  officer 
be  employed,  who  did  not  conform  to  the  presbyterian 
discipline.  But  while  great  changes  were  made,  and 
the  army  was  no  longer  on  a  war  footing,  4000  of  the 
soldiers  of  the  'New  Model'  were  retained  in  England, 
having  their  quarters  at  Saffi'on  Walden.  At  this 
juncture  these  became  restive  and  defiant,  and  when 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  141 

Comet  Joyce,  with  500  mounted  troopers,  rode  over 
to  Holmby  House  and  took  possession  of  the  King's 
person,  the  situation  was  vitally  changed. 

What  happened  after  this  can  only  be  briefly 
summarised.  The  execution  of  the  King  in  1649 
was  followed  by  a  declaration  of  Parliament  that 
*  England  shall  henceforth  be  governed  as  a  Common- 
wealth or  Free  State,  by  a  supreme  authority  of  this 
nation,  the  representatives  of  the  people  in  Parlia- 
ment.' But  the  Parliament  thus  taking  to  itself 
supreme  power  had  really  ceased  to  be  representative 
of  the  national  will.  By  the  expulsion  of  royalist 
members  during  the  war  and  of  presbyterians  in 
1648  it  had,  as  Cromwell  said,  been  'winnowed  and 
sifted  and  brought  to  a  handfull.'  When  first 
elected  in  1640  it  consisted  of  490  members ;  in 
January,  1649,  there  were  not  more  than  ninety. 
Four  counties,  Lancashire  being  one  of  them,  had 
no  representatives  at  all ;  Wales  had  only  three  and 
London  one.  Yet,  though  it  was  thus  only  a  mere 
remnant  of  its  former  self,  this  Parliament  continued 
to  sit  on,  and  sat  all  the  year  round  ;  and  moreover, 
by  an  Act  passed  in  1641,  it  could  not  be  adjourned, 
prorogued  or  dissolved  except  by  its  own  consent. 
In  1653  it  was  discussing  a  Bill  providing  for  its  own 
continuance,  and  for  still  retaining  in  its  own  hands 
both  legislative  and  executive  power,  when  Cromwell 
hurried  down  to  the  House,  and  by  an  act  of  revo- 


142  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

lutionary  violence  dismissed  this  which  has  been 
described  as  once  the  most  powerful  Parliament 
ever  known  in  England. 

But  now  the  urgent  question  was  what  should 
take  its  place.  After  much  discussion,  and  not  a 
little  disagreement,  Cromwell  and  the  council  of 
the  army  decided  to  call  a  Parliament  of  puritan 
notables,  the  congregational  churches  of  the  various 
counties  being  invited  to  send  up  the  names  of 
persons  fit  to  be  members,  from  which  a  selection 
might  be  made.  Eventually  the  list  included  160 
persons.  There  was  no  pretence  of  election,  and 
the  assembly  thus  formed  came  to  be  known  as  the 
Little  Parliament  of  1653,  and  sometimes,  by  way  of 
ridicule,  as  Barebone's  Parliament,  fi'om  the  name 
of  one  of  its  members.  But  though  thus  made  the 
butt  of  ridicule  on  the  part  of  cavaliers,  it  contained 
not  a  few  distinguished  and  capable  men  and  did 
not  a  little  useful  work.  It  abolished  the  Court  of 
Chancery,  where  23,000  cases  of  from  five  to  thirty 
years'  standing  were  lying  undetermined.  It  estab- 
lished civil  marriages  and  provided  for  the  registra- 
tion of  births,  marriages  and  burials  ;  and  a  com- 
mittee was  also  appointed  to  codify  the  law.  But 
reforms,  as  these  men  found  full  soon,  create  enemies, 
and  though  they  were  entitled  to  sit  till  1654,  by  the 
end  of  1653  they  abdicated  their  places  and  sur- 
rendered their  powers  into  the  hands  of  Cromwell 
as  Protector  of  the  Commonwealth. 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  143 

After  being  solemnly  installed  on  December  16, 
1653,  according  to  the  '  Instrument  of  Government ' 
he  and  his  council  were  empowered  to  issue  ordi- 
nances having  the  force  of  law  *  until  order  shall  be 
taken  in  Parliament  concerning  them,'  the  first 
triennial  Parliament  to  meet  in  September,  1654. 
Cromwell  took  full  advantage  of  this  his  opportunity, 
and  the  nine  months  when  he  was  thus  practically 
absolute  have  been  described  as  the  really  creative 
period  of  his  government.  He  issued  eighty-two 
ordinances,  nearly  all  of  which  were  confirmed  in 
1656  by  his  second  Parliament.  Those  of  them 
most  characteristic  of  his  domestic  policy  are  the 
three  divisions  bearing  upon  the  reform  of  the  law, 
the  reformation  of  manners  and  the  reorganisation 
of  the  National  Church.  His  purpose  was,  as  he 
said,  to  make  the  laws  of  man  *  conformable  to  the 
just  and  righteous  laws  of  God.'  Some  English  laws, 
he  told  Parliament,  were  'wicked  and  abominable 
laws,  and  he  protested  against  hanging  a  man  for 
six  and  eightpence  : '  '  to  see  men  lose  their  lives  for 
petty  matters  is  a  thing  God  will  reckon.' 

In  the  reformation  of  manners  Parliament  went 
faster  than  they  carried  public  opinion  with  them ; 
and  Cromwell's  major-generals  by  peremptory  harsh- 
ness made  puritan  legislation  to  be  spoken  of  as 
puritan  tyranny.  The  observance  of  the  Sabbath, 
for  example,  was  enforced  not  merely  to  the  extent 


144  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

of  closing  shops  and  stoppage  of  manufacture,  but 
so  far  as  to  put  an  end  to  all  travelling  on  that  day 
except  in  cases  of  necessity  attested  by  certificate 
from  a  justice  of  the  peace  ;  and  persons  '  vainly  and 
profanely  walking  on  the  day  aforesaid '  were  to  be 
punished.  These  major-generals,  while  looking  to 
the  maintenance  of  order,  were  to  control  the  local 
authorities,  put  down  horse-races,  bear-baitings  and 
cockfights,  to  expel  vagrants,  close  unnecessary  ale- 
houses, cause  drunkenness  to  be  duly  punished,  and 
even  report  to  the  council  all  justices  who  were 
negligent  in  discharging  the  duties  of  their  office. 
It  is  on  record  that  ale-houses  were  closed  by  the 
hundred  ;  and  beggars,  idlers  and  debauched  persons 
were  arrested  in  such  numbers  that  the  authorities 
were  at  a  loss  where  to  imprison  them,  and  called 
for  wholesale  transportation.  Many  things  they  did 
which  were  in  the  interest  of  morality  and  public 
order,  but,  unfortunately,  were  too  often  done  in  a 
way  to  create  deep  discontent  and  rouse  a  storm  of 
opposition. 

Still  it  must  not  be  forgotten  that,  while  seeking 
to  reform  the  morals  of  the  nation  by  process  of  law, 
Cromwell  really  laid  more  stress  on  the  influence  of 
education  and  religion.  When  making  an  educa- 
tional grant  for  Scotland  he  declared  that  it  was  *a 
duty  not  only  to  have  the  Gospel  set  up,  but  schools 
for  children  erected  and  maintained  therefor.'  Milton, 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  145 

too,  advocated  the  foundation  of  schools  in  all  parts 
of  the  nation  ;  and  Harrington  in  his  Ocecma  (1656) 
asserted  that  the  formation  of  future  citizens  by 
means  of  a  system  of  free  schools  was  one  of  the 
chief  duties  of  a  republic.  In  1651  Cromwell 
strongly  urged  the  endowment  in  the  north  of  a 
school  or  college  for  all  the  sciences  and  literature 
out  of  the  property  of  the  dean  and  chapter  of 
Durham. 

It  need  not  be  said  that  he  was  also  as  solicitous 
about  the  religion  of  the  nation  as  for  the  education 
of  its  citizens.  These  were  not  for  him  two  questions 
but  only  two  sides  of  one  question,  that  of  the  eleva- 
tion of  the  people.  Dealing  with  this  it  was  found 
necessary  to  reorganise  the  system  of  the  National 
Church.  For  though  the  presbyterian  discipline  had 
been  established  by  Parliament,  the  ecclesiastical 
condition  was  far  from  working  smoothly.  It  was 
found  out  then,  not  for  the  first  time  or  the  last,  that 
it  is  one  thing  to  create  a  constitution  by  Parliament 
and  quite  another  to  make  it  a  vital  part  of  the 
nation's  life.  The  minutes  of  the  provincial  assem- 
blies make  it  only  too  clear  that  a  form  of  church 
government,  accepted  under  constraint  and  un- 
willingly, went  heavily  on  its  way.  There  was 
opposition  and,  what  was  perhaps  worse,  there  was 
indifference  on  the  part  of  a  large  body  of  the  laity. 
In  January,  1648,  the  London  synod  reported  that 

B.  10 


146  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

four  out  of  the  twelve  classes  appointed  by  Parlia- 
ment had  not  yet  been  formed  and  therefore  had 
sent  no  delegates.  And  even  four  years  later,  in 
1652,  in  an  appeal  made  by  the  provincial  assembly 
fears  were  expressed  of  'the  utter  dissolution  of 
presbyterian  government.'  There  was  greater  diflB- 
culty  still  with  the  parochial  elderships.  It  was 
reported  from  St  Matthew's,  Friday  Street,  that 
*  the  minister  hath  endeavoured  to  get  elders  chosen, 
but  cannot  move  his  parishioners  to  it ' ;  and  from 
St  Peter's,  Paul's  Wharf,  also, '  that  the  people  cannot 
be  induced  to  choose  elders,  nor  to  have  a  minister 
that  may  act  with  the  Government.'  In  many  other 
places  also  through  the  country  there  were  churches 
which  declined  to  elect  elders  and  set  up  discipline. 
In  Lancashire  the  presbyterian  system  obtained  more 
widely  than  elsewhere,  yet  even  there  its  efficient 
working  was  in  many  places  hampered  either  by 
indifference  or  open  hostility.  Adam  Martindale 
tells  us  that  in  his  own  parish  of  Gorton  the  system 
could  not  be  worked  because  some  were  against 
ruling  elders  as  unscriptural  and  strangers  in  an- 
tiquity, while  divers  were  downright  for  the  con- 
gregational way,  and  yet  others  did  not  like  to  be 
under  the  power  of  ruling  elders  who  might  have 
been  chosen  at  some  place  ten  miles  away  from 
them. 

The  ca^e  being  gOj  it  was  no  easy  task  to  which 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  147 

Cromwell  put  his  hand  when  in  1654  he  and  his 
council  proceeded  to  reorganise  the  National  Church 
system.  Men  like  Milton  and  Sir  Harry  Vane  were 
opposed  to  a  State  Church  altogether.  The  magis- 
trates, Milton  contended,  had  no  coercive  power  at 
all  in  matters  of  religion.  It  was  not  his  business 
*to  settle  religion,'  to  use  the  current  phrase,  'by 
appointing  either  what  we  shall  believe  in  divine 
things  or  practice  in  religion.'  On  the  other  hand, 
the  framers  of  the  '  Instrument  of  Government '  were 
invincibly  opposed  to  the  voluntary  system.  All 
therefore  that  Cromwell  and  his  council  could  do 
in  the  way  of  ecclesiastical  organisation  was  to 
determine  in  what  way  the  ministers  of  the  National 
Church  should  be  appointed  or  dismissed,  how  far 
restrained  in  their  teaching,  and  from  what  sources 
they  should  be  paid.  The  State,  then,  had  nothing 
to  say  as  to  forms  of  ordination,  or  even  whether 
there  was  to  be  ordination  at  all.  All  that  it  con- 
cerned itself  with  when  a  minister  appeared  before 
them  was,  as  to  whether  he  had  a  right  to  maintenance 
as  secured  to  ministers  under  certain  conditions  laid 
down  by  law.  This  was  to  be  determined  by  a  body 
of  commissioners,  known  as  Triers,  consisting  of 
ministers  and  laymen  who  might  content  them- 
selves with  requiring  the  certificate  of  three  persons 
testifying  to  the  holy  and  good  conversation  of  the 
person  to  be  admitted  to  the  benefice.    The  right  of 

10-2 


148  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

the  patron  to  present  to  the  benefice  remained  intact 
and  unchallenged.  All  that  the  Triers  could  do  was 
to  see  that  he  did  not  present  an  unfit  person.  In 
the  State  Church  system  thus  reconstructed  in  1664 
there  was  no  one  recognised  form  of  ecclesiastical 
organisation,  and  therefore  no  mention  made  by 
name  either  of  episcopacy,  presbyterianism  or  inde- 
pendency. There  were  no  Church  courts,  no  Church 
assemblies,  no  Church  laws  or  ordinances.  Nothing 
was  said  about  rites  and  ceremonies,  nothing  even 
about  sacraments.  The  mode  of  administering  the 
Lord's  Supper  and  baptism  was  left  an  open  question 
to  be  determined  by  each  congregation  for  itself.  It 
was  further  provided  that  if  there  were  churches 
that  preferred  to  worship  outside  the  national  system 
altogether  they  were  at  liberty  to  do  so.  The 
Articles  of  Government  declared  that  such  persons 
'  shall  not  be  restrained,  but  shall  be  protected  in  the 
profession  of  the  faith  and  exercise  of  their  religion, 
so  as  they  abuse  not  their  liberty  to  the  civil  injury 
of  others,  and  to  the  actual  disturbance  of  the  public 
peace  on  their  part.'  Of  course  it  must  be  admitted 
that  the  liberty  was  'not  to  extend  to  popery  or 
prelacy  ; '  but  on  this  point,  Dr  Rawson  Gardiner,  an 
ideally  fair-minded  historian,  has  this  to  say  :  '  With 
the  exception  of  the  condemnation  of  the  use  of  the 
Common  Prayer,  the  scheme  was  in  the  highest  sense 
broad  and  generous  ;  and  it  is  well  to  remember  that 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  149 

those  who  strove  to  reserve  the  use  of  the  Common 
Prayer  were  a  political  as  well  as  an  ecclesiastical 
party,  and  that  the  weight  and  activity  of  that 
party,  except  so  far  as  it  appealed  to  the  in- 
different in  religion,  were  out  of  all  proportion  to 
its  numbers.' 

In  his  National  Church  settlement  Cromwell 
seems  honestly  to  have  aimed  at  bringing  about  a 
real  union  of  tolerance  and  comprehension.  How 
far  his  experiment  might  have  succeeded  had  longer 
time  been  granted  to  it  can  only  be  left  to  conjec- 
ture. But  the  requisite  conditions  depended  on  the 
continuance  of  his  own  life.  He  was  the  one  strong 
man  in  the  nation,  the  only  one  able  to  control  and  com- 
bine the  conflicting  elements  of  the  time,  and  he  wai 
not  suffered  to  continue.  Prodigal  of  his  great  soul, 
he  had,  in  the  high  places  of  the  war  and  in  the 
strenuous  work  of  government,  lavishly  spent  his 
vital  force  till,  old  before  his  time,  he  passed  away 
on  the  3rd  of  September,  1658. 

When  Cromwell  fell  the  rule  of  the  puritan  feU 
with  him.  The  sceptre  of  sovereignty  having  passed 
to  feebler  hands,  conflicting  forces,  both  religious  and 
political,  which  had  been  held  in  check,  now  rose  in 
tumult,  and  confusion  reigned  supreme.  But  while 
hostility  to  puritanism  on  the  part  of  some  of  the 
people  was  one  of  the  forces  which  brought  about 
the  downfall  of  the  Commonwealth,  it  was  not  the 


150  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

only  one,  nor  the  one  that  was  strongest.  Sir  Henry 
Vane  attacked  the  validity  of  Richard  Cromwell's 
title,  and  made  alliance  with  the  army  against  him, 
yet  there  was  no  more  fervent  puritan  than  Sir 
Henry  Vane.  The  presbyterians,  again,  formed  the 
great  body  of  the  puritan  party ;  they  far  out- 
numbered the  independents,  and  it  was  by  their 
action,  and  theirs  alone,  that  the  Solemn  League  and 
Covenant  was  enforced  upon  the  English  people ; 
yet  the  restoration  of  the  monarchy  was  mainly 
brought  about  by  the  presbyterians.  They  supposed 
that  Charles  II  meant  what  he  said  when  in  his 
declaration  from  Breda  he  promised  that  liberty 
should  be  secured  to  tender  consciences  ;  and,  with 
a  credulity  at  which  one  can  only  wonder,  they 
believed  in  1659  as  they  had  believed  in  1649  that 
they  could  secure  his  consent  to  the  national  es- 
tablishment of  the  presbyterian  system  of  Church 
government.  They  had  always  been  adherents  of 
monarchy,  and  the  Convention  Parliament  which 
succeeded  the  Long  Parliament,  and  by  which  the 
Bang  was  restored,  was  half  of  it  presbyterian. 

It  was  not  only,  nor  mainly,  dislike  of  puritanism 
that  brought  about  the  counter-revolution  of  1660. 
There  was  the  weariness  resulting  from  incessant 
change  and  uncertainty ;  there  was  the  deep-seated 
love  of  monarchical  government  in  the  heart  of  the 
English  people  ;   there  was  the  revulsion  of  feeling 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  151 

brought  about  by  the  beheading  of  King  Charles  I, 
for  it  may  be  truly  said  that  the  execution  of  the 
King  brought  back  the  King,  it  made  men  forget 
his  misdeeds  and  invested  him  with  the  sanctity  of 
a  martyr — these  and  other  forces  of  political  sort 
combined  together  to  bring  down  the  Common- 
wealth, When  that  came  down  puritanism,  which 
had  gone  out  of  power  when  the  army  was  dis- 
banded, came  down  with  it.  So  far  as  its  influence 
in  the  State  was  concerned,  an  influence  which  at  one 
time  had  been  paramount,  its  fall  was  as  sudden, 
complete  and  overwhelming  as  its  triumph  had  been 
rapid  and  surprising.  When  it  held  the  reins  of 
government,  it  made  the  rulers  of  Europe  not  only 
to  respect  England  but  to  fear  her.  And  then  the 
wheel  went  full  cycle  round.  Those  of  its  leaders 
who  escaped  death,  exile  and  imprisonment  had  to 
undergo  proscription,  and  fell  into  obscurity.  Men 
who  had  been  piUars  of  the  State,  victorious  in  war, 
and  conspicuous  in  the  eyes  of  the  civilized  world 
were  deprived  of  the  most  elementary  rights  of 
citizenship.  Triumphant  puritans  became  helpless 
and  persecuted  nonconformists.  Puritanism  passed 
through  more  than  a  quarter  of  a  century  of  cruel 
oppression  and  suffiBring,  but  there  is  often  a  soul  of 
good  in  things  evil,  and  that  time  of  relentless  per- 
secution created  sacred  traditions  which  have  borne 
fruit  in  consecrated  lives.    Puritanism,  rightly  looked 


152  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

at,  is  not  a  thing  of  one  time  but  for  all  time.  It 
stands  for  the  supremacy  of  the  will  of  heaven 
against  the  passions  and  clamours  of  earth.  Its 
defect  has  too  often  been  that  it  gave  too  narrow 
an  interpretation  of  what  really  is  the  will  of  heaven. 
The  principles  at  the  heart  of  it — obedience  and 
righteousness — are  the  binding  forces  without  which 
society  would  go  to  pieces ;  but  while  recognising 
the  value  of  these  it  failed,  at  least  many  of  its 
followers  failed,  to  recognise  also  the  value  of  the 
more  graceful  and  genial  elements  of  human  life, 
without  which  its  glory  and  blessedness  are  not 
complete. 

But  while  thus  much  may  be  conceded,  it  must 
at  the  same  time  be  contended  that  the  men  of  the 
Commonwealth  were  by  no  means  the  harsh  and 
narrow-minded  fanatics,  looking  grimly  upon  all  fair 
and  pleasant  things  in  life,  which  cavalier  writers 
have  sought  to  make  them  appear.  Cromwell  cer- 
tainly condemned  no  innocent  pleasures.  He  himself 
hunted,  hawked  and  played  the  games  of  the  time 
as  did  the  royalist  country  gentlemen  who  were  his 
neighbours,  and  had  as  real  a  love  for  a  fine  horse  as 
they.  One  of  his  contemporaries  tells  us  that  he  was 
'a  great  lover  of  music  and  entertained  the  most 
skilful  in  that  science  in  his  pay  and  family,'  and 
that  when  he  gave  a  banquet  to  foreign  ambassadors 
*  rare  music  botii  of  instruments  and  voices '  was  one 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  163 

of  the  features  of  the  entertainment  To  his  credit, 
too,  in  matters  of  art  it  must  be  remembered  that  he 
saved  the  cartoons  of  Raphael  and  the  'Triumph' 
of  Mantegna  for  the  nation,  whereas  in  later  years 
Charles  II  tried  to  sell  them  to  the  King  of  France. 
Milton,  again,  his  Latin  secretary,  no  man  can  call 
a  narrow-minded  fanatic,  but  rather  a  man  of  loftiest 
genius  whose  '  soul  was  like  a  star  and  dwelt  apart,' 
a  poet  having  a  voice  *  whose  sound  was  like  the  sea  : 
pure  as  the  naked  heavens,  majestic,  free.'  And 
turning  from  Cromwell  and  Milton,  we  may  recall 
the  picture  of  Colonel  Hutchinson,  the  governor  of 
Nottingham  Castle,  as  given  to  us  by  his  puritan 
wife.  While  '  his  faith  being  established  in  the  truth 
he  was  full  of  love  to  God  and  all  His  saints,'  not  less 
than  any  of  his  royalist  neighbours  was  he  graced 
with  the  ordinary  accomplishments  of  life,  *  had  skill 
in  fencing  such  as  became  a  gentleman,  great  love 
of  music,  playing  masterly  on  the  viol,  and  had 
great  judgement  in  paintings,  gravings,  sculpture, 
and  all  liberal  arts,  and  had  many  curiosities  in 
aU  kinds.' 

It  is  admitted  that  the  puritans  were  averse  to 
dramatic  representations  and  hostile  to  the  stage. 
The  reason  for  this  Kingsley  has  given  us.  He  has 
shewn  that,  with  the  exception  of  Shakespeare,  it 
was  the  custom  of  the  comedies  of  the  seventeenth 
century    to    introduce    adultery  as    a    subject    for 


154  THE  ENGLISH  PURITANS 

laughter,  and  often  as  the  staple  of  the  whole  plot, 
the  seducer  being  let  pass  as  a  *  handsome  gentle- 
man' and  the  injured  husband  made  the  object  of 
every  kind  of  scorn  and  ridicule.  And  he  thinks 
that  most  people  nowadays  will  surely  'agree  with 
the  puritans  that  adultery  is  not  a  subject  for 
comedy.  It  may  be  for  tragedy,  but  for  comedy, 
never.' 

To  this  question  of  puritanism,  then,  as  to  so 
many  others,  there  are  two  sides,  one  of  serious 
estimate,  and  another  of  burlesque  and  travesty. 
And  time  tries  both.  Puritan  institutions  in  the 
seventeenth  century  fell  with  Cromwell,  but  puritan 
ideas  did  not  fall  with  the  institutions  in  which  they 
had  been  embodied.  They  had  done  a  great  and 
permanent  work  in  the  sacred  cause  of  liberty.  The 
puritans  arrested  the  growth  of  absolute  government 
in  England,  a  growth  which  had  made  rapid  advance 
under  the  personal  government  of  the  Tudors  and 
was  fatally  proceeding  under  the  Stuart  kings  who 
succeeded  them.  And  what  made  it  the  more  dan- 
gerous was  that  it  had  succeeded  among  the  other 
nations  of  Europe.  As  we  have  already  seen,  abso- 
lute monarchies  had  everywhere  else  risen  on  the 
ruins  of  national  liberties,  so  that  a  man  could  rise 
in  Parliament  in  1626  and  declare  that  the  English 
were  the  last  people  in  Christendom  that  maintained 
their  rights.     How  long  might  they  be  able  to  say  they 


TRIUMPH  AND  DOWNFALL  166 

were  doing  so  ?  It  was  the  turning-point  of  national 
destiny,  and  it  was  puritanism  that  came  to  the 
rescue.  The  situation  demanded  that  religious  en- 
thusiasm should  go  hand  in  hand  with  the  love  of 
liberty,  to  resist  the  encroachments  of  the  Prince. 
It  has  been  truly  said  that  puritan  zeal  turned  the 
scale  in  the  conflict  between  divine  right  and  par- 
liamentary authority.  So  that  if  puritanism  fell,  it 
fell  in  the  hour  of  victory.  The  Stuart  kings  came 
back,  but  there  did  not  come  back  with  them  the 
Star  Chamber,  or  the  Court  of  High  Commission, 
or  ship-money  or  forced  loans  and  benevolences. 
The  battle  of  constitutional  liberty  had  been  fought 
and  won. 


AUTHORITIES 

Dangerous  Positions  published  and  practised  within  this  Iland  of 

Brytaine  under  pretence  of  Reformation.    1583. 
A  Survey  of  the  Pretended  Holy  Discipline.    1593. 
The  Perpetual  Government  of  Christes  Church  by  Thos.  Bilson, 

Warden  of  Winchester  College.     1593. 
A  Parte  of  a  Register,  The  State  of  the  Church  of  England  laid 

open  in  a  Conference. 
Life  of  John  Whitgift  by  Sir  George  Paule.     1599. 
Sir  Simonds  D'Ewes'  Journal  of  Parliament  in  the  Reig^a  of 

Queen  Elizabeth.     1693. 
The  Presbyterian  Movement  in  the  Reign  of  Queen  Ehzabeth  as 

illustrated  by  the  Minute  Book  of  the  Dedham   Classes, 

1682—1589.     R.  Hist.  Soc.     1905. 
Strype's  Lives:   Archbishop  Parker,  1711;  Archbishop  Grindal, 

1710  ;  Archbishop  Whitgift,  1718.     3  vols,  folio. 
Strype's  Annals.    4  vols.  foUo.     1735. 
Neal's  History  of  the  Puritans,  1732—1738. 
A  Retrospect  of  Religious  Life  in  England  by  J.  J.  Tayler.    1853. 
History  of  the  Early  Puritans  by  J.  B.  Marsden.     1854. 
Histoiy  of  the  Later  Puritans  by  J.  B.  Marsden.     1854. 
History  of  the  Church  of  England  by  R.  W.  Dixon,    6  vols. 

1878-1902. 
Introduction  to  the  Fifth  Book  of  Hooker's  Ecclesiastical  Polity — 

the  Puritan  Position,  by  Francis  Paget,  D.D.    1899. 


AUTHORITIES  167 

Church  and  State  under  the  Tudors,  by  Gilbert  W.  Child,  of 

Exeter  College,  Oxford,     1890. 
Oliver  Cromwell  and  the  Rule  of  the  Puritans  in  England  by 

Charles  Firth,  M.A.     1903. 
Carlyle's  Letters  and  Speeches  of  Oliver  Cromwell.     1904. 
History  of  the  English  Church  during  the  Civil  Wars  and  under 

the  Commonwealth,   1640—1660,  by  W.  A.   Shaw,  LittD. 

2  vols.     1900. 
Henry  Barrow,  Separatist  (1550? — 1593),  by  Fred.  J.  Powicke, 

Ph.D.     1900. 
The  Martin  Marprelate  Tracts.    W.  Pierce,  1909. 
History  of  the  University  of  Cambridge,  by  J.  Bass  Mullinger. 

1888. 
State  Papers,  Domestic,  Elizabeth,  James  I... Charles  I. 
Zurich  Letters,  1558—1579;  Second  Series,  1558—1602.    Parker 

Society. 
Documents  illustrative  of  English  Church  History.    Edited  by 

Henry  Gee  and  W.  J.  Harding.    1896. 


INDEX 


Act  of  Six  Articles,  24 
Acts    of    Supremacy    and    Uni- 
formity, 6,  13,  17,  21 
Admonition  to  Parliament,  First, 

57;  Second,  60 
Adrertisements,  Archbishop 

Parker's,  30,  34 
Alexander  VI.,  Pope,  37 
Anglo-Cathohc  party,  117-119 
Army  of  the  New  Model,  137 
Arrest  of  Five  Members,  132 
Aylmer,  Bishop,  72 

Bancroft,  Archbishop,  114 
Barrow,  Henry,  102,  107-110 
Baxter,  Eichard,  2 
Beza,  Theodore,  50 
Browne,  Eobert,  56,  102-3 
Bucer,  Martin,  7 
Bulkeley,  Peter,  124 
BuUinger,  Henry,  31 
Burleigh,  Lord,  77,  79 
Burroughs,  Jeremiah,  136 
Bury  St  Edmunds,  103,  104 

Cambridge  University  Press,  82 
Cartwright,  Thomas,  Lady  Mar- 
garet Professor,  50;  lectures 
on  Church  Government,  51; 
opposed  by  Whitgift,  51;  de- 
prived and  expelled  the  Uni- 
versity, 52 ;  in  the  Fleet  prison, 
99 


Cecil  MSS.,  79 
Channel  Islands,  89 
Charles  I.,  levies   taxes  by  pre- 
rogative, 118;  governs  without 
Parliament,   121 ;  raises  stan- 
dard of  War,  132 
Clergy  placed  under  Interdict,  76 
Communion  Table  or  Altar,  123 
Conventicle  Act  of  1593,  110 
Convocation,    Overture    in,    27; 

Canons  of,  55 
Cooper,  Bishop,  96-7 
Cromwell,     Ohver,     pleads     for 
tolerance,  136,  137 ;  his  policy, 
143-148  ;  his  death,  149 

De  Feria,  Spanish  Ambassador, 

12 
Demonstration  of  Discipline,  96 
Deprived  London  Clergy,  46 
Divine  Eight  of  Episcopacy,  79 

Ecclesiastical  Commissions,    15, 

18,  20,  22,  55,  63 
Ecclesiastica  Disciplina,  81 
Elizabeth,  Queen,  Accession,  5; 
Eehgion,  11,  12,  21;  Supreme 
Governor  of  the  Church,  14, 
15;  First  Parliament  of,  13, 16; 
Second,  26;  Third,  52;  In- 
junctions of,  18 ;  invades  liberty 
of  Parliament,  63-4,  86-7; 
suppresses    Prophesyings,  69; 


INDEX 


169 


conflict  with  Archbishop 
Grindal,  67-71 ;  urges  Whitgift 
to  severe  measures  against 
Puritans,  74 

Eliot,  Sir  John,  119,  127 

Emmanuel  College  and  New 
England,  125 

English  Prayer  Book,  the  First,  7 

Erasmus,  36 

Exiles  in  Holland,  112 

Field  and  Wilcocks,  Admonition 

of,  67,  60 
Fuller,  Thomas,  1,  50,  78,  84 

Grand  Eemonstrance,  131 
Greenwood,  John,  102,  106 
Grindal,  Archbishop,  70,  71 

Hammond,  Dr,  79 

Harvard,  John,  125 

Higginson,  Francis,  126 

High  Commission,  Court  of,  15, 
98,  107,  109,  155 

Hooker  and  Travers,  82;  Eccle- 
siastical Polity,  101 

Hume  on  the  Puritans,  88 

Humphrey,  Dr,  33,  34 

Hutchinson,  Colonel,  153 

Jewell,  Bishop,  12,  20,  25,  31,  72 

Kettering,  91 

Kitchin  of  Llandaff,  21 

KnoUys,  Sir  Francis,  34,  86 

Laud,    Archbishop,    his    policy, 

122;  Metropolitical  Visitation, 

124 
Lever,    Thomas,    Master    of    St 

John's  College,  26,  65 
London  clergy  cited  to  Lambeth, 

42 


Long  Parliament,  128,  141 

Martin  Marprelate  Tracts,  94-98 
Mary,  Queen,  Accession  and  Acts 

of  Eepeal,  7,  8 
Ministers'  Petition  and  Bemon- 

strance,  131 

New  Learning,  the,  8,  11 
Nonconforming  Clergy,  33 
Northampton,  63,  65,  90,  91 

Oglethorpe,  Bishop,  11,  12 
Ornaments  Eubric,  17 

Paget,  Dr,  68,  80 
Parker,  Archbishop,  26,  30,  34,  66 
Penry,  John,  97,  110 
Pilkington,  Bishop,  29,  72 
Pilgrim  Fathers  of  New  England, 

125 
Pluralism  in  the  Church,  68 
Press,  Censorship  of  the,  93 
Presbyterian   movement   in   the 
Church,  78;   at  Wandsworth, 
88-9 ;     in    Northamptonshire, 
90-1;  in  Cambridge,  91-2;  in 
the  Channel  Islands,  89 
Presbyterian  Book  of   Common 

Prayer,  86 
Presbyterianism    in    the    seven- 
teenth century,  introduced  from 
Scotland,  133;  established  by 
law,  134 
Presbyterian  Intolerance,  138-9 
Presbyterians      and      royalists, 

139-40,  150 
Prophesyings,  64-5,  67-8 
Protestant  Exiles  in  Switzerland, 

9-11 
Puritanism,   its   varied  applica- 
tions, 1,  2;  its  character,  162- 
156;  its  downfall,  161 


160 


INDEX 


Puritan  platform,  tlie,  58,  62 
Puritans,  Hume  on  the,  88 

Bochelle,  81 

Eoot-and-Branch   Petition,  128; 
Bill,  130 

Separatist    Churches,    103,    105, 

106 
Sampson,  Dr,  26,  32,  34,  55 
Star  Chamber,  93,  98,  109,  155 
State  Papers,  56 
Scambler,  Bishop,  63 
Solemn    League   and  Covenant, 

134 
St    John's    College,   Cambridge, 

38,  39,  92 
Strickland,  53 

Strype's  History,  22,  57,  64 
Sturbridge  Fair,  91-2 

Thetford,  execution  at,  104 
Three  revolutions  in  the  English 

Church,  5 
Throckmorton,  Job,  97 
Travers,  Walter,  his  Ecclesiastica 

Di^ciplina,  81,  82,  83 
Turner,  Dean  of  Wells,  32 
Tyudale,  William,  36 


Udall,  John,  94;  his  Diotrephes, 
94;  Demonstration  of  Dit- 
cipline,  96;  trial  at  Croydon 
Assizes,  100;  death  in  prison, 
100 

University  of  Cambridge,  36,  50 

Vestiarian  Controversy,  25,  37, 
39,  41-43,  55 

Waldegrave  Press,  93,  95,  97 
Warwick  Association,  90-1 
Wentworth,  Peter,  54,  57 
Whitgift,  Archbishop,  Paula's  Life 
of,  73 ;  reply  to  First  and  Second 
Admonition,       60 ;       succeeds 
Grindal  as  Archbishop,  73-4; 
Articles  against  Puritans,  74; 
Metropolitical    Visitation,   75; 
estabUshes     Court    of     High 
Commission,  7 ;  Interrogatories, 
77;   action  against  the  Press, 
82 ;  makes  an  end  of  organised 
Presbyterianism  in  the  English 
Church,  98 
Whittingham,  Dean,  66 
WUcocks,  57,  60 
Withers,  George,  37 
Wolsey,  Cardinal,  36 


CAMBKIDGB  :    PKINTED  BY  JOHN  CLAY,  M.A.  AT  THE  UNIVEB8ITT  PBB8S 


University  of  California 

SOUTHERN  REGiONAL  LiBRARY  FACILiTY 

305  De  Neve  Drive  -  Parl<ing  Lot  17  •  Box  951388 

LOS  ANGELES,  CALIFORNIA  90095-1388 

Return  this  material  to  ttie  library  from  wJiichi  it  was  borrowed. 


Sssys- 


U     A  reasonable  number 
of  books  may  be  taken  at 
a  time  and  kept  for  two 
weeks,  expect  in  special 
cases,   when   by  ar- 
rangement with  the 
Librarian    at    the 
time  they  are  taken 
out* 

2.  A  fine  of  two 
cents  per    day    is 
charged    for     each 
book  overdue, 

3.  No    person    can 
take  out  a  book  whose 
fine  is  unpaid. 

4.  Any    book    lost,    or 
damaged    beyond  reason- 
able  wear   must    be  paid 
for  or  replaced. 

Keep  Your  Card  in  This  Pocltet. 


